Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_03 03 2005sub LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD MARCH 3, 2005 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being ten (10) in number. II. Members Present: Gary Langlais Jeff Yates Robert Stebbins Norm Floyd Mizan Rahman Bill Rector Jerry Meyer Fred Allen, Jr. Darrin Williams Chauncey Taylor Members Absent: Pam Adcock City Attorney: Cindy Dawson III. Approval of the Minutes of the January 20, 2005 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA MARCH 3, 2005 OLD BUSINESS: A. LU04-17-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Crystal Valley Planning District located at 17415 Lawson Road from Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial. A.1. Loux Short-form PCD (Z-6683-A), located at 17415 Lawson Road. B. LU04-01-07 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain Planning District on the North side of Cantrell Road West of Pinnacle Valley Road from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use. B.1. PDC Company Short-form POD (Z-7603-A), located North of Cantrell Road, West of Taylor Loop Road. C. Griffin Preliminary Plat (S-1473), located on the Southwest corner of West 24th Street and Walker Street. D. MDS of Tennessee Medical Waste Disposal Facility Conditional Use Permit (Z-7785), located 5400 Scott Hamilton Drive. NEW BUSINESS: I. PRELIMINARY PLATS: 1. Chenal Valley The Arbors (Blocks 83 and 84) Revised Plat (S-867-SSSSS), located on Vigne Boulevard. 2. Glenn Ridge Addition Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1426-A), located on the Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and I-430. 3. Ranch West Office Park Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1441-B), located on the East side of Ranch Valley Drive, West of Patrick Country Road. 4. Two Rivers Harbor Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-1477), located on the East end of Isbell Lane, West of County Farm Road, North of Two Rivers Park. 5. Bellevue Addition Replat Tract 1 (S-1478), located at 7700 Cantrell Road. 6. Yarberry Place Addition Preliminary Plat (S-1479), located South of Yarberry Lane, East of Kerry Road. Agenda, Page Two II. Site Plan Review – Conditional Use Permits: 7. Sage Meadows Apartments Revised Site Plan Review (S-1229-B), located on John Barrow Road, South of Tanya Drive. 8. Best Park Commercial Surface Parking Lot Conditional Use Permit (Z-7788), located at the Southeast corner of 6th and Center Streets. III. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS - PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: 9. Sage Meadows Long-form PD-R Revocation (Z-3173-D), located on the West side of John Barrow Road, South of Tanya Drive. 10. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU05-03-01), in the West Little Rock Planning District in the 8500 Block of Rodney Parham Road from Single Family to Suburban Office. 10.1. Ferguson Short-form PD-O (Z-5182-A), located at 8501 North Rodney Parham Road. 11. Brodie Creek Lot 101R Revised PD-R (Z-5963-E), located at 8 Briar Patch Court. 12. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU05-20-03), in the Pinnacle Planning District at the Northwest Corner of Highway 10 and the entrance to Little Rock Christian Academy from Single Family to Mixed Office Commercial. 12.1. Muewly Long-form POD (Z-6079-F), located at the Northwest corner of Highway 10 and the entrance to Little Rock Christian Academy. 13. Arkansas Association of Nigerians Revised Short-form PCD (Z-6932-B), located at 9802 Geyer Springs Road. 14. Fletcher Short-form PCD (Z-6985-A), located at 8121 Jamison Road. 15. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU05-01-01), in the River Mountain Planning District located North of Cantrell Road and West of Pinnacle Valley Road from Single Family and Transition to Commercial. 15.1. Rees Development Revised Long-form PCD (Z-7500-A), located North of Cantrell Road, West of Pinnacle Valley Road. Agenda, Page Three III. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS - PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (Cont.) 16. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU05-04-01), located in the Heights Planning District in the 700 Block of North University Avenue from Office to Mixed Use. 16.1. University Park Short-form PD-R (Z-7563-A), located at 715 North University Avenue. 17. Rock Haven Revised Short-form PD-R (Z-7665-A), located at 1000 Kirby Road. 18. Dennis Properties Long-form PCD (Z-7786), located at 11421 Stagecoach Road. 19. Skyhawk Circle Long-form PD-C (Z-7787), located at 4500 Skyhawk Circle. 20. Serenity Park Short-form POD (Z-7789), located at 2801 West Roosevelt Road. 21. Walker Short-form POD (Z-7790), located at 820 North Buchanan Street. 22. Colclasure and George Short-form PCD (Z-7791), located at 18501 Lawson Road. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: LU04-17-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Crystal Valley Planning District Location: 17415 Lawson Road Request: Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial Source: Kenny Loux PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Crystal Valley Planning District from Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities. The applicant would like to use an existing vacant building and graveled lot for a used car lot and vehicle maintenance activities. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the entire Neighborhood Commercial extending southwest from the Lawson-Sullivan Road intersection. With these changes, 78% of the existing Neighborhood Commercial node would be converted to Commercial. It is thought that the additional area would make the boundaries more logical and incorporate existing businesses. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is partially developed with a mobile home in the center of the lot and a metal building located at the front of the lot currently zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District and 1.97 acres ± in size. The application is in the Extraterritorial Planning Area and the area has several non-conforming uses. The land north of the site and on the opposite side of Lawson Road is zoned R-2 -Single Family District consisting of several single family homes and mobile homes situated on narrow lots close to Lawson Road because of the hilly terrain rising from the roadway. Northwest of the site is an area zoned C-1 -Neighborhood Commercial District similar in terrain with additional homes, an abandoned multiple bay coin carwash, and land zoned C-3 with a garage and a small auto/parts salvage yard. Directly east of the property is a CUP - Conditional Use Permit for the Crystal Volunteer Fire Department. Further east at the Lawson/Sullivan Road Intersection is a PCD with two small business uses including Wickety Wax Candle Manufacturing and Tactfully Done Upholstery. On the opposite side of Sullivan Road are two small buildings, one a seasonal sno-cone outlet and the other an office use, Custom Advertising Products, Inc. Further southeast of the property are additional single family homes fronting Lawson Road on narrow lots. South of the site are several mobile homes on single family lots fronting Minton Road and vacant wooded land. Immediately west is a PCD for a seasonal sno-cone stand and mobile March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02 2 home. Further to the west at Morehart Road is land zoned R-2 with several single family homes on large lots. Northwest of the property is additional R-2 land with an abandoned auto sales building with a gravel lot, and a mobile home with a small auto/parts salvage yard. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: June 1, 1999. A change was made from Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial on the south side of Lawson Road, west of Sullivan Road, expanding the existing Neighborhood Commercial to including the applicant’s property for proposed development. The surrounding areas are shown as Single Family. A node of Neighborhood Commercial 6.4 acres ± in size exists at the intersection of Sullivan and Lawson Roads. This node expands west from Sullivan Road on the south side of Lawson Road to include the applicant’s property. MASTER STREET PLAN: Lawson Road and Sullivan Road are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. Lawson Road may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. PARKS: The property under review is not located in a recognized Park Planning District and does not show any existing or proposed parks in the area. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02 3 ANALYSIS: This section of Lawson Road lies in a rural area of Pulaski County and was added to the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction March 1, 1988. The present Neighborhood Commercial was established in 1992 to represent a small commercial node at the intersection of two minor arterial streets. Typically commercial areas are located at major intersections and limited to approximately five acres. The Neighborhood Commercial area was chosen to provide low intensity commercial activities in the area while protecting the area’s rural character. Originally (1992) the area shown as Neighborhood Commercial was 2.4 acres ± in size and on June 1, 1999 Ordinance #18,030 was approved expanding the Neighborhood Commercial area from the southwest corner of the Sullivan-Lawson Road intersection towards the applicant’s property which was shown as Single Family. This expansion was initiated at the request of the owner of the land in 1999, not the present applicant. The expansion added 4.2 acres ± of Neighborhood Commercial bringing the total amount shown to 6.4 acres ±, more than double that of 1999. The existing Neighborhood Commercial area is surrounded by numerous single family homes in a rural atmosphere. Because of steep terrain on the north side of the roadway, a majority of the homes have situated themselves close to the roadway giving this section of Lawson Road a rural community atmosphere. The existing area presently shown as Neighborhood Commercial is more than adequate for area residents at this time. Due to the topography of the area developments on the north side of Lawson Road will have to be smaller scale to prevent major cuts or fills, which is supportive of the Neighborhood Commercial concept. Also, when future street improvements are made to Lawson Road topography will prevent large commercial development from occurring on the north side of the property. Showing this land as Commercial would result in a strip of Commercial shown on the south side of Lawson Road. Identifying a strip of Commercial could lead to large scale high intensity strip commercial development, which could be incompatible with adjacent uses. Incompatible uses could result in pressure to expand the Commercial in the area resulting in larger scale more intense uses. Due to the topography north of Lawson Road large scale Commercial uses will be limited unless major cut and fill operations are undergone. Further changes could also result in a higher intensity Commercial node at the Stewart and Lawson Roads intersection. Since the area in question is shown as Neighborhood Commercial, uses could be limited in scale and intensity leading to more desirable commercial activities. The Neighborhood Commercial shown does indicate a strip of Commercial on the south side of Lawson Road and could lead strip commercial. However, since it is Neighborhood Commercial, scale and intensity can be limited making future development more compatible with surrounding land uses. Limiting uses in this area to Neighborhood Commercial will be more compatible with surrounding Single Family and the existing Neighborhood Commercial in the area. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02 4 Almost 90%, 5.6 acres ±, of the Neighborhood Commercial shown is being used for commercial or office use. Generally the businesses located in the area are not targeted at the immediate area residents. Auto repair, candle manufacturing, scrap yards, advertising agencies, and upholstery typically draw from a larger demographic area as compared to the local sno-cone shops. In turn showing this area as Commercial might better recognize the existing businesses in the area and facilitate similar businesses in the future. However, in the area there is an abundance of land shown as Commercial or Mixed Commercial Industrial. This Neighborhood Commercial area makes up just 25% of the 33 acres ± identified for commercial uses within a mile of the site. Uses of higher intensities have been centered at the intersection of Marsh and Lawson Roads while the lower intensity uses have been centered at the present location of the Neighborhood Commercial. Changing this area to a higher intensity use could be considered premature due the amount of Commercial shown less than a mile west of the property. The land west of the application is more suitable for Commercial activities focusing on a larger demographic area. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Crystal Valley Property Owners Association and the Plantation House Homeowners Association. Staff has received four comments from area residents. None are in support, two are opposed to the change, and two were neutral. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. A Neighborhood Commercial area provides low intensity uses to a local area. Higher intensity commercial uses would be incompatible with the existing rural residential character of the community, and land is shown less than a mile west that can facilitate the applicant’s request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier the by-laws for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion was made and approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not submitted any alternatives or scheduled any meetings with Staff regarding this application. The application remains unchanged. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 20, 2005) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the March 3, 2005, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to waive the by-laws for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion was made and approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not submitted any alternatives or scheduled any meetings with Staff regarding this application. The application remains unchanged. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Donna James made a presentation of item A.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item A. See item A.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Loux Short Form Planned Commercial Development. Wes Lowder, of Mehlberger Engineering, spoke and represented the applicant. He asked for persons in support of the application that was in the audience to stand. Sonny Simpson, of Redbud Lane, spoke in support of the application and spoke of the applicants’ response to earlier requests from the neighborhood in an effort to be a good neighbor. Kathleen Oleson, of the Pulaski County League of Women Voters, stated that the owner may move and the C-4 type use would be there permanently. She continued that the previous commercial zoning of the land does not mean that you would be required to zone the PCD. A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with a vote of 0 ayes, 10 noes, and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: A.1 FILE NO.: Z-6683-A NAME: Loux Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 17415 Lawson Road DEVELOPER: Kenny Loux 18305 Lawson Road Little Rock, AR 72210 ENGINEER: Delton Brown Land Surveying 2421 County Line Road Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 1.97 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District and R-2, Single-family District ALLOWED USES: Limited retail development adjacent to neighborhoods and Single-family PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C and R-2 PROPOSED USE: Used car automobile dealership and Single-family Variance/Waivers: 1. A five year deferral of the required Master Street Plan improvements to Lawson Road. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,063 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 20, 1999, rezoned the north 180-feet of the site from R-2, Single-family to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and left the remainder of the site zoned R-2, Single-family District. A Conditional Use Permit was also approved for the site to allow a furniture repair business to operate on the site. An older singlewide manufactured home was located on the southern half of the tract, which remained zoned R-2, Single-family. The applicant proposed the construction of a new 40-foot by 80-foot metal building on the March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 2 north one half of the site. Signage was to be limited to signage allowed in offices zones or six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Deed Document No. 2000024890 indicates a dedication of right-of-way to the City of Little Rock 20 of additional feet from the south right-of-way line of Lawson Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the rezoning of the portion of this 1.97-acre parcel previously zoned from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District (the north 180- feet) to PD-C to allow the sale of used automobiles from the site. The remainder of the property will remain zoned R-2, Single-family District. The property is located outside the City Limits but within the Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The applicant has indicated the existing building will be used for vehicle maintenance. The applicant’s cover letter indicates vehicle maintenance will include repair or replacement of worn parts and damaged body parts. The site plan also indicates 36 parking spaces for the display automobile inventory. The proposed site plan includes two areas for building expansion. The site plan includes the placement of a 30-foot by 40-foot addition to the west side of the building and the addition of a 60-foot by 30-foot area to the rear of the building. The applicant has indicated these expansion areas for potential growth should the need arise in the future. The applicant has indicated employee parking will be located in the rear of the building. The site plan indicates paved areas will be constructed of ground asphalt compacted to a minimum of four inches. The material will then be sealed to maintain the hard surface. The applicant is requesting a five (5) year deferral of the required street improvements to Lawson Road. The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this parcel of property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The area is very rural in nature with the predominate land uses being single-family homes on large tracts and large tracts of undeveloped property. A small commercial node is located just east of this site, at the intersection of Lawson and Sullivan Roads. Several small businesses are located at that intersection. There is a local volunteer fire department and a small commercial business located adjacent to the site. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Lawson Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required. 2. With future construction, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan for a five lane arterial. Construct one-half street improvement to the street with the planned development or obtain a Board of Directors deferral of street construction. 3. The site is outside of the existing corporate limits. No storm water detention or grading permits are required. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. The Fire Department having jurisdiction 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. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: A 40-foot building line is required along all property lines that adjoin residential properties. Indicate owners and uses of all adjoining parcels on the site plan. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 4 Indicate the actual right-of-way line. The County will not allow a cable fence to be installed less than 20-feet from centerline of Lawson Road, it is neither legal nor safe. All driveways accessing County roads require permitting from Pulaski County Road and Bridge (501) 340-6800. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Crystal Valley Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development -PCD for a used car lot featuring 30-40 vehicles. Vehicle maintenance and repair will be done in an existing building on site. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda (File No. LU04-17-02 – Item #7). Master Street Plan: Lawson Road and Sullivan Road are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. Lawson Road may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: The plan submitted does not allow for the 28-foot wide on-site street buffer required along Lawson Road. A six 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. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004) Mr. Kenny Loux was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested Mr. Loux provide details of the proposed vehicle maintenance to be performed on the site. Mr. Loux stated limited bodywork would be preformed on automobiles but no March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 5 parts would be stored on the site. Staff also requested a detailed parking plan. Mr. Loux stated automobiles would be placed along the western perimeter and along the roadway frontage of Lawson Road. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the required right-of-way dedication would be 45-feet from centerline. Mr. Loux questioned the required right-of-way to meet County standard. Pulaski County Planning staff stated 25-feet. Mr. Loux questioned if the dedication could meet the County standard and not City standard. Staff stated not without a waiver from the Little Rock Board of Directors concerning the Master Street Plan requirements. (It was later determined the right-of-way is currently in place at 45-feet from the centerline.) Mr. Loux also stated to install the street improvements at this time would be a hardship. Staff stated he could seek a deferral from the Little Rock Board of Directors concerning the required improvements. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed site plan did not meet the minimum ordinance requirement of 28-feet. Staff stated at a minimum a landscape strip of nine feet would be required along Lawson Road to meet the City Beautiful Commission requirement. Staff stated less than nine feet would require the applicant to make application to the City Beautiful Commission for relief. County Planning comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed gate would not be allowed in the location indicated. Staff stated the location was not legal and created a safety concern. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a detailed parking plan for the site. The applicant has also indicated only minor engine repair and minor body repair will be conducted on the site. The applicant has indicated there will be no storage of parts or materials on the site other than automobiles display. The applicant is requesting the placement of automobiles within the existing right-of-way and the placement of a cable fence within the existing right-of-way. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm six days per week. The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The applicant is not requesting any ground signage as a part of the development. The site plan includes the placement of signage on the awning located on the front of the building. The applicant has March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 6 indicated there will be four employees of the business. The applicant has also indicated site lighting will be low level and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned properties. The applicant has indicated two expansion areas. One expansion area is located to the west of the building and is located approximately 35-feet from the Lawson Road property line and approximately 15.3 feet from the western property line. The second expansion area is located to the rear of the existing building. The applicant has indicated these expansion areas are to allow for future growth. The expansion areas are estimated at 1200 square feet and 1800 square feet. Employee parking has been designated adjacent to the rear expansion area. The applicant has indicated display parking on the proposed site plan. The applicant has indicated 14 parking spaces fronting Lawson Road within the existing right-of-way. The applicant has also indicated 22 parking spaces along the western property line. The total available display parking indicated is 36 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated parking will be constructed of reclaimed asphalt grindings compacted with 6-inches to 8-inches of material, rolled and seal coated within one year. The existing manufactured home on the site is to remain. The home is used as a residence and is not proposed as any alternative uses. Access to the home is located along the eastern property line by a single drive shared by the proposed automobile dealership. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required landscaping on the site. The typical minimum ordinance requirement for a site of this depth would be a 28-foot wide on-site street buffer along Lawson Road and a six 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. The site plan does not include any areas identified for landscape or land use buffers. Staff is not supportive of the proposed request. The indicated site plan does not comply with current city ordinances and county ordinances with regard to building setbacks and landscaping. Per the current County Ordinances, all buildings should be set a minimum of 40-feet from all property lines. The building with expansion is indicated at approximately 35-feet from the front property line and 15.3 feet from the western property line. To be allowed the expansion areas a variance from Pulaski County Planning Board would have to be approved. Staff does not feel approving a site plan that does not meet current County requirements is appropriate without the County Planning Board first approving the variances. The site was zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District with a Conditional Use Permit to allow furniture repair on the site. Staff feels the requested use as March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 7 a automobile dealership with automobile body repair (which is typically allowed in C-4, Open Display District) is too intense for the site. In addition, staff is not supportive of the placement of the indicated cable fence within the existing right-of-way. The placement of the cable within the right-of-way creates a safety concern as well as a liability concern for the County. Staff is also not supportive of the applicant’s request to display vehicles within the existing right-of-way. The applicant has indicated the additional area is needed to allow the use of the site as an automobile dealership. Staff feels the applicant may be trying to do too much on the site if this 20-feet is required to make the project work. Staff feels the site should utilize the existing neighborhood commercial uses as was previously approved. Staff feels the open display district is too intense for the area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter requesting the item be deferred to the January 20, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated the request would require a waiver of the By-laws for the late deferral request. A motion was made to waive the By-laws for the later deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing additional concerns raised prior to the December 2, 2004, Planning Commission Public Hearing. The applicant has indicated only minor engine repair will be conducted on the site and no body repair will be performed at the site. The applicant has indicated there will be no storage of parts or materials on the site other than automobiles display. The applicant has removed his request for the placement of automobiles within the existing right-of-way and the placement of a cable fence within the existing right-of-way. The applicant has indicated on the site plan the current right-of-way as was previously dedicated as a part of the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District zoning approval. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 8 As was previously proposed the applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm six days per week. The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The applicant is not requesting any ground signage as a part of the development. The site plan includes the placement of signage on the awning located on the front of the building. The applicant has indicated there will be four employees of the business. The applicant has also indicated site lighting will be low level and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned properties. The applicant has removed his request for two expansion areas. One expansion area was located to the west of the building and was located approximately 35-feet from the Lawson Road property line and approximately 15.3 feet from the western property line. The second expansion area was located to the rear of the existing building. The applicant indicated these expansion areas were needed to allow for future growth. The expansion areas were an estimated 1,200 square feet and 1,800 square feet. Employee parking continues to be designated adjacent to the rear of the existing building. With the removal of the proposed expansion areas the site plan now complies with Pulaski County’s 40-foot building setback requirement. The applicant has indicated display parking on the proposed site plan. The applicant has indicated display parking fronting Lawson Road, display parking along the western property line and display parking along the eastern property line. The total available display parking indicated on the site plan is 36 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated parking will be constructed of reclaimed asphalt grindings compacted with 6-inches to 8-inches of material, rolled and seal coated within one year. The existing manufactured home on the site is to remain. The home is used as a residence and is not proposed as any alternative uses. Access to the home is located along the eastern property line by a single drive shared by the proposed automobile dealership. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the required landscaping on the site. The typical minimum ordinance requirement for a site of this depth would be a 28-foot wide on-site street buffer along Lawson Road and a six 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. The applicant has indicated plantings will be installed along the eastern perimeter of the site to screen adjoining property. The applicant has indicated the street buffer at nine feet. The indicated buffer does meet the minimum landscape strip requirement but does not meet the buffer average requirement. Staff is not supportive of the proposed request. The site was zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District with a Conditional Use Permit to allow furniture repair on the site. Staff feels the requested use of an automobile dealership is too intense for the site. The site is located within an area identified on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as Single-family residential. There are areas to the east of the site designated as March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 9 Neighborhood Commercial and areas to the west of the site designated as Commercial and Mixed Commercial Industrial. Staff does not feel this is an appropriate location to introduce a C-4, Open Display District commercial activity. Staff feels the proposed use would be more appropriate locating in an area, which is not predominately single-family. Staff feels the site should utilize the neighborhood commercial uses as was previously approved. Staff feels the open display district is too intense for the area. Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the March 3, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral requested would take a waiver of the By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the By-law waiver and the deferral request. A motion was made to waive the By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 no and 1 absent. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 no and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated the applicant had amended his request to address most of the technical issues raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff stated the applicant had removed his request to allow the placement of automobiles and a fence within the right-of-way. Staff also stated the applicant had indicated landscaping along the eastern and western property lines. Staff stated the applicant was not providing the required street buffer. Staff stated the site plan indicated a street buffer of nine feet and not the 28-foot average as typically required by the zoning ordinance. Staff stated the amended request did not include expansion areas therefore street improvements would no longer be required. Staff stated if and when expansions were requested street improvements would then be required. Staff also stated the applicant was not proposing any bodywork or the storage of parts or materials on the site. Mr. Wes Lowder addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the applicant owned an existing business about ½ mile from the current application site. He stated the applicant was requesting a rezoning to allow the placement of 36-cars on the lot for resale. He stated the applicant had revised his site plan to address most of staff’s concerns and comments. He stated the applicant was requesting a reduced landscape March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A 10 strip adjacent to Lawson Road. He stated the applicant had indicated a nine foot landscape strip which would meet the minimum required landscape strip but the area did not meet the required average of 28-feet. He stated the applicant was proposing the placement of landscaping along the eastern and western perimeters of the site. Mr. Lowder stated the applicant was not proposing any bodywork, storage of parts or materials and was no longer requesting an expansion of the proposed buildings. Mr. Lowder stated there were several neighbors who had come to show support of the proposed development. He requested the individuals stand to show support. Ten persons were present. Mr. Sonny Simpson addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. He stated he had lived in the area for 25 plus years and was well aware of Mr. Loux and his business practices. He stated his current business was a business that needed screening and Mr. Loux had placed a fence adjacent to the roadway to provide the screening. He stated he had talked to a number of neighbors and most of which indicated support for Mr. Loux’s request to place a car lot in the requested area. He stated he felt Mr. Loux would run a clean business and be an asset to the area. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the request to rezone the site from C-1 to C-4 was a dramatic change. She stated the proposed request would change the landscape of the area and to place a C-4 use in an area identified as Single Family on the plan was not appropriate. Commissioner Rector questioned the application request. Staff stated the request was a Planned Development to place a C-4 use on the site. Commissioner Rector stated the request was for a specific commercial use and not allow the allowed uses in C-4. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and if the approval would allow the transfer of ownership. Staff stated the request was not limited to Mr. Loux. Mr. Loux stated he would be willing to amend his application to limit the approval to his ownership of the property and his ownership of the business. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 4 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: LU04-01-07 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District Location: Cantrell Road west of Pinnacle Valley Drive Request: Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use Source: Joe White, White Daters Engineering PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use. The Mixed Use category 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. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office & Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a POD -Planned Office Development for a mixed use development. The applicant has previously applied for a POD and a Land Use Plan Amendment from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use that was withdrawn without prejudice at the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission hearing. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is a house built on a large lot and currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is about 3.58 acres in size. The remainder of the expanded area includes a single family home and an out building on a large lot and currently zoned R-2. The vacant land to the north is zoned R-2 Single Family. The property to the east is zoned Planned Commercial Development with a recently constructed Walgreen’s and a Catfish City Restaurant under construction, both at the intersection of Cantrell and Taylor Loop Roads. Further to the east is a development zoned C-3, General Commercial District, anchored by a hardware store and other small offices and restaurants. The land to the southeast is a Planned Commercial Development for the David Claiborne furniture store and the Victorian Garden Restaurant. Further southeast is a POD, PDO-Planned Development Office, and even farther southeast are areas zoned as R-2 and PCD - Planned Commercial Development, for a bank, church, offices, hair salon, animal clinic and single-family homes. The land to the south and southwest is mostly vacant land zoned R-2 with a single family development backing onto Cantrell Road and PR for parks and recreational use. The property to the west is zoned PDO with a Bank of the Ozarks at the front of the lot and a two story office building at the rear. Further to the west are several PODs consisting of homes converted into offices. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On April 6, 2004, a change was made from Transition to Commercial about a quarter mile northeast of the applicant’s property at Cantrell Road and the east leg of Taylor Loop Road, immediately northeast of the expanded area, to accommodate proposed development. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07 2 On August 19, 2003 a change was made from Transition to Commercial to about a half mile to the northeast of the property on the north side of Cantrell Road just east of Pinnacle Valley Drive to accommodate a proposed development. On February 18, 2003 multiple changes were made within a 1 mile radius of the project site recognize existing conditions. These include Transition to Suburban Office north of the site, Transition to Single Family about quarter mile west of the site, Transition to Commercial about a half mile east of the site and on the opposite side of Cantrell Road, and Transition to Single family about one mile due east of the site The applicant’s property is shown as Suburban Office and Transition on the Future Land Use Plan. The neighboring land to the north is shown as Single Family. The property to the east and southeast is shown as Commercial. The property south of the amendment area is shown as Transition and Single Family. The property to the southwest is shown as Single Family and Park / Open Space. The area to the west is shown as Suburban Office. MASTER STREET PLAN: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan. Cantrell Road is built as a five-lane road through that area. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Cantrell Road may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. Since this property is located on a Principal Arterial, access to the site should be minimized and should not impede through traffic. Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows the Taylor Loop Park located a short distance to the southwest of the applicant’s property. Taylor Loop Park is shown as a park of 35.0+ acres. Taylor Loop Park is listed as an undeveloped Community Park intended to remain as a passive open space parcel of undeveloped land and is designed to serve the open space needs of several neighborhoods. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07 3 the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping and Excavation Ordinance. This action could result in the removal of trees in order to accommodate the development of uses possible in the Commercial land use category. ANALYSIS: The application area is located in an area of the city characterized by an increase in Office and Commercial uses. Suburban Office requires a Planned Zoning District and a change to Mixed Use would continue the requirement of Planned Zoning Districts for new non-residential developments. Although this amendment could increase the amount of Commercial development along the north side of Cantrell Road, development style could be limited to acceptable design standards through the site plan review process. The back part of the applicant’s property was the subject of a Land Use Plan Amendment for a change from Transition to Suburban Office as part of a Future Land Use review along Cantrell Road presented to the Planning Commission on January 9, 2003. The change to Suburban Office for the front part of the applicant’s property was approved since it was felt that Office developments were more likely to take place fronting Cantrell Road. It was also determined that the Transition land use category should remain in some areas to allow for office development similar to the requirements found in the Suburban Office category while also allowing residential development. Within a half mile of this property is a total of about 52.01 + acres shown as Commercial at two commercial nodes less than a half mile apart on Cantrell Road. These two nodes are at the east leg of Taylor Loop Road and east of Pinnacle Valley Drive. Changing this property to Mixed Use could result in an increase of 10 + acres of commercial uses, a 20% area increase. Three recently approved PCDs are located either at the existing Taylor Loop node or in between the two. The new pattern of PCDs indicates a trend of infill at and between the two existing nodes. This amendment would expand potential Commercial west, not following the present trend of infill at or between the existing commercial nodes. Immediately west of this application land shown as Suburban Office has recently developed with three PODs consistent with the Land Use Plan. If the application area were to remain Suburban Office the possibility of similar office development of the site could occur, which would limit westward expansion of the Cantrell Road/Taylor Loop node and be consistent with the present office development in the area. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association, River Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey Community Improvement Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association, Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, Walton March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07 4 Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association, Westbury Neighborhood Association, Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association, Chenal Ridge Property, and Charleston Heights/North Rahling Road Neighborhood Association. Staff has not received any comments from Neighborhood Associations at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This amendment would further increase the amount of Commercial along the north side of Cantrell Road while expanding the existing Commercial node to the west. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier the by-laws for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion was made and approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not submitted any alternatives or scheduled any meetings with Staff regarding this application. The application remains unchanged. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 20, 2005) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the March 3, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not submitted any alternatives or scheduled any meetings with Staff regarding this application. The application remains unchanged. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Donna James made a presentation of item B.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07 5 item B. See item B.1 for a complete discussion concerning the PDC Company Short Form Planned Commercial Development. Joe White, of White Daters Engineering, spoke for the applicant. He stated that the development had a ratio of 87% office and 13% commercial. On the Land Use Plan, the typical planning practice would be to gradually decrease in intensity from Commercial to Office to Single Family. This site would accommodate the transition to the west. He continued that if the uses were in one building, the Land Use Plan would not be a requirement. Dr. McGrew, a resident in the area, spoke in general support of the application and asked questions concerning the impact on his property. Nathan Culp, President of the Westbury neighborhood, spoke in opposition to the change. He stated that it was an expansion of the commercial uses in the area and continued that it would add to the traffic congestion of the area. He stated that this contributes to the ‘strip zoning” of Highway 10. Kathleen Oleson, of the Pulaski County League of Women Voters, spoke in opposition to the application. She stated those two years ago that the Land Use Plan was changed to accommodate growth and there was not a reason to change it now. Commissioner Bill Rector spoke of the definition of Transition and spoke in favor of the application. Commissioner Jeff Yates mirrored Rector’s comments. Commissioner Floyd stated that all of Highway 10 could be considered a node and that they could just strip it all out like Rodney Parham. Commissioner Rector redefined his node saying that the PK/OS strip was the western portion of his node. A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was approved with a vote of 6 ayes, 4 noes, and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7603-A NAME: PDC Companies HWY 10 Short-form POD LOCATION: North of Cantrell Road approximately 0.1 miles West of Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: PCD Companies HWY #10 1501 North University Avenue, Suite 740 Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 3.58 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: 65 percent office 35 percent commercial VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance – The creation of a lot without public street frontage. BACKGROUND: A request to rezone this site from R-2, Single-family to POD was filed and withdrawn from consideration prior to the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The applicant proposed a development to include office and commercial activities on this 3.58 acre site. The previous request was identical to the application now being considered. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the development of this 3.6 acre parcel as a Planned Office Development, POD to allow the development of the site with a March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 2 office/commercial facility and the creation of a two lot plat. There will be a single building on each parcel. Lot 1 will have a drive-through restaurant containing 3000 square feet. Lot 2 will contain 21, 000 square feet of office space and 8200 square feet of commercial space. The overall percent for each use on the site is sixty-five percent office and thirty-five percent commercial. The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this parcel of property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an occupied single-family home. To the east of the site is also an occupied single-family home with the Wal-Greens development located further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a newly constructed branch bank adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office located in the rear of the site on a separate lot. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single- family. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site, the Westbury Neighborhood Association, the Westchester Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association, the Secluded Hills Neighborhood Association and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The standard conditions shown on the plans as “Public Works Notes” apply to the project. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project to serve Lot 2. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 3 SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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). 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. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of 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. 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: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office & Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development for office and commercial development. The applicant has previously applied for a POD and a Land Use Plan amendment from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use that was withdrawn without prejudice at the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission hearing. A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (Item #10 – File No. LU04-01-07). Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan. Cantrell Road is built as a five-lane road through this area. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Cantrell Road may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. Since this property is located on a Principal Arterial access to the site should be minimized and should not impede through traffic. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 4 Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance. This action could result in the removal of trees in order to accommodate the development of uses possible in the Commercial land use category. Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. A six foot high screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required where adjacent to residentially zoned properties to the north. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a POD to allow the development of an office/commercial development. Staff stated the percentages requested were consistent with those allowed for a Planned Office Development. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested Mr. White provide details concerning the proposed uses of the development. Staff also requested the total building coverage be provided in the general notes section of the site plan. Staff stated the proposed building on Lot 1 was indicated at 80-feet and the typical required setback on Highway 10 was 100-feet. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the conditions noted in the general notes section would apply to the proposed development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the areas set aside for buffers appeared to meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff also noted screening would be required to the north where adjacent to single-family zoned properties. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 5 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee Meeting. The applicant has indicated the dumpster location for proposed Lot 2 on the site plan and included a note concerning screening. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed as required by the zoning ordinance or at a minimum on three sides at least two feet above the finished grade of the container. The applicant is requesting the creation of a two lot plat through the planned development process. The requested subdivision will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. The proposed lot will be served by a sixty foot access and utility easement through Lot 1. The applicant has indicated a development sign will be located near the front drive. The applicant has indicated the sign will be a ground mounted monument style no more than ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. The proposed signage is consistent with signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has also indicated a tenant ground mounted sign, maximum allowed by ordinance, near the western property line. Staff is not supportive of the requested signage. Staff feels the placement of two signs on this single development is not consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has indicated Lot 1 will develop with a restaurant and Lot 2 will develop with an office/commercial development. The applicant has indicated the proposed uses for Lot 2 are those listed in the O-3, General Office Zoning District along with the Conditional Uses and the Accessory Uses with no limit on the percentages allowed. Typically, an O-3 development is allowed ten percent of the gross square footage to develop with the listed accessory uses. The listed Conditional Uses requires approval from the Commission. The site plan includes the total building coverage for each lot. The total building coverage for proposed Lot 1 is 5.69 percent and for proposed Lot 2 is 28.3 percent. The applicant has indicated the development of Lot 1 as a restaurant with 3,000 square feet of building space and 50 parking spaces. The total lot area contains 1.21 acres. The proposed lot area is more than adequate to meet the minimum required lot size for a commercially zoned site but not in compliance with minimum lot sizes typically required under the Highway 10 Design Overlay District or 2 acre minimum lot sizes. The proposed parking is also adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand for a restaurant. The typical minimum parking required for a restaurant would be 30 parking spaces. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 6 The applicant has indicated an office development on Lot 2 consisting of 21,000 square feet of office space and 8,200 square feet of commercial space. The applicant has indicated 116 parking spaces to serve Lot 2. The typical minimum parking required for the site would be 93 parking spaces based on one space per 225 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed parking is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum demand. The applicant has indicated a reduced building line adjacent to Cantrell Road and a reduced landscape buffer along Cantrell Road. The applicant has indicated an 80-foot building setback (100-foot typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District) and a 35-foot landscape buffer (typically 40-feet by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District). Staff is not supportive of the reduced request. Other sites, which have redeveloped in the area have typically maintained the integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff feels the developer is requesting to overbuild the site and the proposed site plan does not maintain the integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to landscaping and front building line placement. The applicant has requested a Planned Office Development to develop the site with the indicated uses. The percentage of office and commercial use is consistent with percentages allowed in the Zoning Ordinance for a Planned Office Development. Staff does not feel however, the proposed development is appropriate to the site. With the placement of a restaurant on the lot abutting Cantrell Road and the office building located to the rear of the site the overall development will be commercial in character and is not consistent with the City’s Future Land Use Plan. A Land Use Plan for this site has been filed on this agenda as a separate item (Item # 10 – File No. LU04-01-07). Staff feels the proposed request is inconsistent with the adopted plan and feels the change to the plan is inappropriate. With the development of this site as a “commercial development” staff feels this will expand the previously identified commercial node at Taylor Loop thus “stripping out Cantrell Road”. Since the zoning request is inconsistent with the City’s Land Use Plan and the development will have a commercial character, staff is not supportive of the request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter requesting the item be deferred to the January 20, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated the request would require a waiver of the By-laws for the late deferral request. A motion was made to March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 7 waive the By-laws for the later deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 20, 2005) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated January 13, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the March 3, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 no and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Staff stated the applicant had amended his request to limit the commercial aspect of the development to thirteen percent of the total building square footage. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a two lot plat as a part of the development. Staff stated the site plan indicated a restaurant on proposed Lot 1 and an office building on proposed Lots 2. Staff stated the applicant had removed his request for commercial uses in the building on proposed Lot 2. Staff stated the request included O-3, General Office District uses only. Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the site was located near the intersection of two arterials. He stated at the intersection there was a commercial node containing a Wal-Greens, Catfish City and a site approved for a strip retail center. He stated there was one property between his client’s property and the commercial activities current occupied as a residence. He stated at the time of redevelopment of this remaining site it was unlikely the remaining piece would be redeveloped as an office use. He presented a map showing the area around the site and the current development pattern. He stated the uses in the area were commercial at the intersection of the two arterials, stepping down to office uses to the west of the proposed site. He stated he felt the request for the current application was in compliance with the City’s adopted Land Use Plan by March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 8 allowing a step down in intensity of uses. He stated the proposal included the development of a predominately office development with a small portion of the development being allowed commercial activity. Doctor McGrew addressed the Commission with questions. He stated he did not wish to leave his current home and if the development were approved he would request proper buffers and screening to protect his residence. He stated he would request an eight foot privacy fence along the adjoining property line to shield his home for the non- residential activity. Mr. Nathan Culp addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he was President of the Westbury Neighborhood Association and his neighborhood was opposed to the rezoning of the site to allow commercial activity. He stated he felt the rezoning was a violation of the City’s current ordinances. He stated he felt the proposed development would have an adverse impact on adjoining properties by the expansion of the existing commercial node. He stated he also felt a C-3 use in Transitional would only increase traffic in the area taxing the existing street network. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated she was representing the League of Women’s Voters of Pulaski County and the League was opposed to the request. She stated only two years ago the Land Use Plan was amended from Transition to Suburban Office to allow for redevelopment of the site. She stated she did not feel commercial was appropriate for the site. Mr. Joe White stated the applicant was willing to amend his application to place an eight foot fence along the adjoining property line with Dr. McGrew. He stated he did not feel the placement of the indicated restaurant would be any more intense than an office development on the site during am and pm peak hours. He stated the applicant was not requesting the placement of a menu order board on the site. He stated the proposal did include a drive-up window to allow call ahead orders to be retrieved from the individual’s car. There was a general discussion concerning the current traffic counts in the area and if staff felt the development would generate traffic counts similar to an office development. Staff stated the current traffic count adjacent to the site was roughly 20,000 vehicles per day. Staff stated the street was nearing design capacity. Staff also stated the development would generate additional traffic in the area but they felt the traffic counts would be similar to an office development on the site. Staff reminder the Commission that they reviewed an amendment package for the Future Land Use Plan at their previous meeting and no change for the site was recommended. Staff stated the goal had been not to create a linear commercial pattern along Cantrell Road. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A 9 There was a general discussion concerning the appropriateness of the use for the site. Commissioner Rector stated he felt the development did allow for the stepping down of intensity of uses from the intersection of Taylor Loop Road and Cantrell Road to the creek located to the West. A motion was made to approve the rezoning request to allow the placement of a restaurant facility without a menu board and only a drive-up pickup window on proposed Lot 1 and an office development containing O-3, General Office District uses on proposed Lot 2 and the amendment to place an eight foot wood fence along the property line adjoining Dr. McGrew’s property. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 4 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: S-1473 NAME: Griffin Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of West 24th Street and Walker Street DEVELOPER: Griffin Construction Company 1914 Calgary Trail Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: Lemons Engineering Consultant, Inc. 204 Cherry Street Cabot, AR 72023 AREA: 1.12 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 10 – Boyle Park CENSUS TRACT: 24.03 Variance/Waivers: 1. A variance to allow a reduced lot width for Lots 1 – 4 of the proposed subdivision. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site contains two parcels located on West 24th and Walker Streets. The applicant is proposing to subdivide these two parcels into five single-family residential lots. The applicant has indicated the lots will average 0.224 acres. The applicant has indicated four of the five lots will have a lot width of 57.70 feet. The fifth lot will have a lot width of 75.01 feet. The Subdivision Ordinance typically requires a minimum lot width of 60-feet with the exception of corner lots and the required minimum lot width of a corner lot is 75-feet. The applicant has indicated a 25-foot front building line for each lot and a 25-foot street side building line for the corner lot. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1473 2 The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way for West 24th Street and Walker Street. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required street improvements to each of the roadways. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant with single-family homes located in the area. There is a High School located to the west of the site accessed from Patriot and John Barrow Road. A single-family subdivision is located to the west of the site on Covenant Cove; a short cul-de-sac street. There is a scattering of single-family homes located to the north and south of the site. To the south of the site is also a relatively new single-family subdivision of R-3 zoned property. Walker is an unimproved street as is West 24th Street. The area has very narrow roadways with open ditches for drainage and very few sidewalks in place. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The abutting property owners along with the John Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Move the proposed lot boundaries on Walker Street south approximately 5-feet to match the platted right-of-way line and property boundaries to the west. 2. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Walker and West 24th Street. 3. Prior to final platting, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. Standard residential street construction should measure 13-feet from centerline to back of curb. Strom drainage piping would likely be required on Walker Street. 4. 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. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 5. Plans for all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted and approved prior to the start of work. Obtain a barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817. 6. Provide the direction of flow and all storm water flows (Q) entering and leaving the property. Easements will be required for drainage culverts located at the southeast corner of the proposed plat area. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1473 3 7. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Gravity sewer must serve all lots. No pump stations will be allowed for individual residences. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: 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 connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. 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: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 29, 2004) Ms. Michelle Griffin was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to subdivide a previously held tract into five single-family lots. Staff stated the request as filed would require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lots 1 – 4 to develop with a reduced lot width. Staff also stated there were a number of items necessary on the proposed preliminary plat to allow the review to be completed. Staff requested the applicant provide the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal in the general notes March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1473 4 section of the proposed preliminary plat. Staff also requested the applicant provide a preliminary storm drainage analysis and a preliminary storm drainage plan indicating a typical ditch section on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff noted the total number of lots and the average lot size would also be required in the general notes section of the site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed lot boundaries on Walker Street did not match the platted right-of-way line and property boundaries to the west. Staff stated the boundary needed to be moved south approximately 5-feet. Staff also stated boundary street improvements would be required prior to final platting. Staff stated a standard residential street would be required for both Walker and West 24th Street with 13-feet of paving from centerline to the back of curb. Staff stated plans for all work in the right-of- way would require approval prior to construction. Staff noted the Fire Department had provided comments stating fire hydrants would be required and the installation would be at the developer’s expense. Staff suggested the applicant contact the Fire Department to determine the number and location and Central Arkansas Water to verify the cost for placing the fire hydrants. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat addressing most of the issues raised at the December 29, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal in the general notes section of the proposed plat. The applicant has also indicated a preliminary storm drainage analysis and a preliminary storm drainage plan along with a typical ditch section. The applicant has indicated the total number of lots (5 lots) and the average lot size in the general notes section (57.7 feet by 153 feet). The applicant has indicated boundary street improvements will be constructed to Walker and West 24th Streets per the Master Street Plan and is no longer requesting a waiver of those requirements. The applicant has also aligned the indicated right-of-way with the existing right-of-way located to the west of the site. The applicant has indicated fire hydrants will be placed as required to meet ordinance standard. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1473 5 The applicant is requesting a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development four of the proposed lots with a reduced lot width. The applicant has indicated Lots 1 – 4 will have a lot width of 57.7 feet. The Subdivision Ordinance typically requires a minimum lot width of 60-feet for properties zoned R-2, Single-family. The applicant has indicated the fifth lot, the corner lot, with a 75-foot width as typically required by the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The area has developed with lots previously platted with a 50-foot lot width. Staff does not feel the indicated reduced lot width will have any adverse impact on adjoining properties. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of proposed Lots 1 – 4 with a reduced lot width. The applicant failed to provide staff with the required additional information from the December 29, 2004, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the March 3, 2005, Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to provide staff with the required additional information from the December 29, 2004, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the March 3, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 no and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Chris Griffin was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1473 6 variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of proposed Lots 1 – 4 with a reduced lot width. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7785 NAME: MDS of Tennessee Medical Waste Disposal Facility – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 5400 Scott Hamilton Drive OWNER/APPLICANT: MDS of Tennessee PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of a medical waste disposal facility on this I-2 zoned, 3.77± acre tract. 1. SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the west side of Scott Hamilton; just south of its northern terminus, north of 65th Street. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located within the 65th Street Industrial District. Uses in the area are industrial in nature; including warehousing and manufacturing. Areas of undeveloped I-2 and R-2 zoned properties are located to the west and north. Section 36-575 of the code states “medical waste disposal facilities shall not be permitted to operate within 1,000 feet of an occupied structure or district zoned for residential uses.” There are 11 occupied structures and the aforementioned R-2 zoned property within 1,000 feet of the proposed facility. In light of this, staff does not believe the proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood. All owners of property located within 1,000 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Upper Baseline, Wakefield, Geyer Springs and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: A single driveway is proposed onto Scott Hamilton Drive. A 24-space parking lot is proposed in front of the building and a truck parking/maneuvering lot is shown behind the building. The business will employ 12-20 persons. It appears there is sufficient parking on the site to accommodate the use. A couple of spaces in the front lot will likely be lost to interior landscape requirements. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7785 2 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The plan submitted does not allow for the 39-foot wide on-site street buffer required by the Zoning Ordinance nor the 9-foot wide on-site landscape strip required by the Landscape Ordinance along the site’s eastern perimeter. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. This site is in a sidewalk exclusion zone. 2. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 3. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. CenterPoint Energy: Four (4) inch steel gas main located on Scott Hamilton. This line has sufficient capacity to serve this location. Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted. Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7785 3 procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) 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 Carroll Keatts at 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire Department: No Comments received. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is not on a CATA bus route. The nearest route is at Scott Hamilton and Hoerner, one block to the south. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JANUARY 6, 2005) Charles Best and Bob Slaughter were present representing the application. Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding signage, days and hours of operation, number of employees, site lighting, dumpster location and fencing. Staff asked for additional information on the proposed operation; including how many trucks would come to the site daily, how long the medical waste would be kept on the site and where the medical waste would be coming from. The applicant was directed to provide a copy of the application or draft application for permit to Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, a copy of the facility’s emergency preparedness plan and a copy of the facility’s maintenance schedule. Staff also noted that the applicant must provide the name of contractors retained to build the facility and proof of license required by Arkansas Code. Staff asked the applicant to redesign the handicap parking spaces on the site plan to comply with ADA standards. Staff informed the Committee of the variance from the required 1,000 foot setback from any occupied structure. Public Works and Landscape Comments were noted. Mike Hood of Public Works noted that the site had been in violation of the City’s Land Alteration ordinance due to premature grading and tree removal. He stated the applicant had responded and staff had set aside remaining restoration requirements pending outcome of the C.U.P. process. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7785 4 The applicant was directed to respond to staff issues by January 12, 2005. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: MDS of Tennessee is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for development of a medical waste disposal facility on the I-2 zoned property located at 5400 Scott Hamilton Drive. The Code defines medical waste as: Medical waste is solid, semisolid or liquid waste and includes isolation waste, infectious agents, pathological waste, human or animal blood and blood products, sharps and nonsharps, human or animal body parts, contaminated bedding, surgical wastes and other contaminated disposal medical equipment and material that may pose a risk to the public health or welfare. A disposal facility is defined as: Disposal facility means any land and appurtenances thereon and thereto, used for the treatment, storage, or disposal by any means of hazardous or medical waste, excluding a crematorium. The applicants propose to construct a 10,600 square foot (106’ X 100’), one- story, prefab metal building on the site. A series of garage door openings will provide truck access into the building. A single driveway will provide access to the site from Scott Hamilton Drive. A 24-space parking lot will be located in front of the building and a truck parking and maneuvering area will be located behind the building. The building will contain offices and the medical waste disposal equipment. Medical waste will be delivered to the site and off-loaded in the building for treatment. The facility uses autoclave (steam) treatment to decontaminate the medical waste. The treated waste is then compacted and delivered to a landfill site for disposal. The applicant has responded to most of the questions raised at Subdivision Committee. Copies of permit applications to Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the Arkansas Department of Health have been submitted. The facility is proposed to operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Copies of the facility’s emergency procedures and standard operating procedures have been submitted and are attached. The maintenance schedule is as follows: March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7785 5 Maintenance schedule – Boiler 1. Honeywell controller will be checked daily. 2. Blow down processed daily to eliminate build up and scale. 3. Gas safety shut off will be checked twice a week. 4. Water safety shut off will be checked twice a week. 5. Steam relief valve will be checked daily. 6. Boiler will have a yearly inspection performed by an outside company and the company, which insures the boiler. 7. Steam lines will be checked daily. Maintenance schedule – Autoclave 1. Steam lines checked daily. 2. Steam relief valve checked daily 3. Honeywell chart checked daily. 4. Honeywell chart and controls are required to be checked and calibrated quarterly by a Honeywell representative. Air compressor checked daily. The facility will have 12 to 20 employees. Ten to fifteen truck deliveries will be made daily to the facility. Medical waste will not be stored on the property for longer than 10 days and any waste held for more than 72 hours will be stored at a temperature of 45 degrees or less. All trucks with medical waste on board will be locked at all times until they are unloaded. After being treated, the medical waste will go into a compactor and then a packer box, which will be taken to a landfill. The applicant will try to take packed boxes to the landfill within 8 hours, but it could be 2 to 3 days because of truck problems, weather or the landfill being closed. Medical waste will come to this facility from Arkansas and from out of state. The parent company of MDS, Commodore, has a medical waste disposal facility in Nashville, Tennessee which will serve as the backup facility for this site. This facility will serve as the backup facility for the Nashville plant. Staff is not supportive of the proposed conditional use. Section 36-575 of the Code states “medical waste disposal facilities shall not be permitted to operate within 1,000 feet of an occupied structure or district zoned for residential uses.” A large area of R-2 zoned property is located approximately 200 feet north of this site. Within a 1,000-foot radius around the site are 11 occupied structures including the following: Laidlaw Bus Terminal; Communication Supply Service Association; Windsor Door; East Harding Contractors; SAIA Motor Freight; CD & L; River City Cold Storage; Klean, Inc.; Earle M. Jorgensen Company; RIC, Inc.; and Essick Air Products. The applicant is requesting a variance of this spacing requirement. Staff believes it is more appropriate for the applicant to locate a site March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7785 6 which would comply with the spacing requirement so as to lessen the potential negative impact on area businesses and properties. An occupied structure is defined as: Occupied structure means a building or other structure: (1) Where any person lives or carries on a business or other calling; or (2) Where people assemble for purposes of business, government, education, religion, entertainment or public transportation; or (3) Which is customarily used for overnight accommodation of persons whether or not a person is actually present. Each unit of a structure divided into separate units designed for occupancy is itself an occupied structure; or (4) Which has not yet been constructed or completed but for which a building permit where applicable has been issued by the city and is valid on the date the application for the conditional use permit is filed. Additionally, the site plan does not provide for the required 39 feet street buffer. The plan proposes instead a 10-foot landscape strip. The applicant has also not provided the identity of contractors retained to build the facility and proof of any license required as stipulated by Section 36-579(10) of the Code. Signage and lighting plans have not been submitted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application. STAFF REPORT: On January 24, 2005, the applicant requested deferral of the item to the March 3, 2005 Agenda. Staff supports the requested deferral. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 3, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the March 3, 2005 Agenda. There was no further discussion. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7785 7 The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the March 3, 2005 meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had failed to send notices as required by the Commission bylaws. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the March 17, 2005 Commission hearing. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-867-SSSSS NAME: Chenal Valley Phase 25 (Lots 1 – 79 Block 83) Replat LOCATION: Located West of Chenal Parkway and North of Chenal Club Blvd. DEVELOPER: Chenal Properties #7 Valley Club Circle Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 32.54 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 79 FT. NEW STREET: 4,300 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 – Chenal Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 42.11 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow a five (5) foot side yard setback for Lots 2 – 12, 20 – 23, 31 – 32 and 40 – 79, Block 83 of the Chenal Valley Phase 26. BACKGROUND: On June 22, 2001, a preliminary plat was approved for the proposed subdivision. On October 7, 2004, the applicant proposed to replat the existing lots to allow a reduced platted building line on a portion of the lots. The applicant indicated a fifteen (15) foot platted building line for Lots 11 – 12 and 61 – 62 Block 83 of the Chenal Valley Phase 25 Subdivision. The applicant indicated a twenty (20) foot building line for Lots 22 – 23, 32, 38 – 43, 55 - 56, 64 and 67 – 72 Block 83 of the Chenal Valley Phase 25 Subdivision and the applicant requested a reduced rear yard setback of fifteen feet for Lots 53 – 79 Block 83 of the Chenal Valley Phase 25 Subdivision. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-SSSSS 2 The development was proposed as a gated community with private streets. There were seventy-nine (79) lots proposed and the site contained 32.54 acres. The applicant indicated the average lot size as 75-feet by 130-feet or 9,750 square feet. The proposed density was 2.42 units per acre. Three phases were proposed with Lots 1 – 12, 20 – 23, 31 – 32 and 40 – 79 in the first phase. Lots 13 – 19 in the second phase and Lots 24 – 30 and 33 – 39 in the final phase. The area abutting Chenal Parkway was indicated as a dedicated tract to be preserved as open space. The applicant indicated a no vehicular access easement through the proposed tract. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved plat to allow for five-foot side yard setbacks within the proposed subdivision. The developer of the project is requesting a variance to allow the development of the subdivision similar to the “Oaks Development” across Chenal Club Boulevard. The developer is requesting the variances for a five-foot side yard setback for Lots 2 – 12, 20 – 23, 31 – 32 and 40 – 79, Block 83 of the Chenal Valley Phase 26 Subdivision. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site was final platted in July 2004, and construction of new homes has begun. The construction of a guardhouse, which is located at the entrance to the subdivision, is also underway. The Chenal Valley Country Club is located to the west of the site with the tennis courts being located near the proposed residential lots. The area abutting Chenal Parkway has been indicated as a dedicated tract to be preserved as open space. To the south of the site, is a single-family subdivision (the Oaks at Chenal), which has developed with reduced front, side and rear yard setbacks. Chenal Parkway, a four-lane median divided roadway, is located to the east of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The abutting property owners along with the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Duquesne Place Property Owners Association and the Margeaux Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-SSSSS 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: No comment on the proposed revision to side yard setbacks. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Easements are required as platted in Instrument 2004-051912, Plat Book H, Page 4. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant had previously final platted the lots but was now requesting to amend the final plat to allow for reduced side yard setbacks. Staff noted there were no outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-SSSSS 4 H. ANALYSIS: There were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request from the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is proposing to revise the previously approved plat to allow a five-foot side yard setback within the proposed subdivision. Previous approvals allow for reduced setbacks on selected lots for the fronts and rear yards. The developer of the project is requesting a variance to allow the development of the subdivision similar to the “Oaks Development” across Chenal Club Boulevard. The effected lots include Lots 2 – 12, 20 – 23, 31 – 32 and 40 – 79, Block 83 of the Chenal Valley Phase 26 Subdivision. The developer has indicated a reduced side yard setback on these selected lots would allow the subdivision to be developed in an alternating pattern and allow for additional buildable area on these lots. The developer has also indicated the concept of the subdivision is one that allows for varying side yard setbacks which adds character to the development. Staff is supportive of this request. Staff does not feel the reduced side yard setback will have an adverse impact on the adjoining properties. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request to allow a five-foot side yard setback on the indicated lots. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the applicant’s requested variance to allow a five-foot side yard setback on the indicated lots. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1426-A NAME: Glenn Ridge Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: On the Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road at I-430 DEVELOPER: Glenn Ridge Crossing, LLC 10600 Colonel Glenn Road Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 30.568 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 8 FT. NEW STREET: 750 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District PLANNING DISTRICT: 12 – 65th Street West CENSUS TRACT: 24.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed and approved a request to subdivide a 13.2-acre site into twelve non-residential lots at their May 18, 2004, Public Hearing. The site was zoned C-3, General Commercial District with a 50-foot open space buffer along the eastern, southern and western perimeters. The applicant indicated Lots 2 – 7 and 12 would be developed as lots without public street frontage. The applicant indicated a sixty-foot access and utility easement to serve the development with a 36-foot roadway where the easement would serve as primary access. The applicant also indicated access easements between the proposed lots to serve as connectivity through the development. The applicant indicated a minimal lot size of 45,000 square feet or 150-feet by 300-feet. The development was proposed to be developed in three phases with Lots 1 – 6 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1426-A 2 developed in the first phase, Lots 10 – 12 in the second phase and Lots 7 – 9 in the final phase. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The developer is now proposing to expand the land area of the proposed subdivision totaling 30.568 acres and reducing the number of lots to eight (8) commercial lots. The site is currently zoned C-3, General Commercial District. The applicant has indicated a minimum lot size of 150-feet by 300-feet or 1.22 acres. The proposed preliminary plat includes lots ranging in size from 1.22 acres to 12.94 acres. A 50-foot open space buffer has been included along the southern and eastern perimeters of the proposed preliminary plat. The developer has indicted 750 linear feet of new street will be added to the City’s street system ending in a cul-de-sac. The developer has indicated the cul-de-sac as a possible future extension to serve properties to the west. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant site with a scattering of trees. For the most part the trees are located around the perimeter of the site in a 50-foot Open Space buffer. The western portion of the site has had previous dirt work and a large ridge was removed and used in the development of the lots to the north of the site. Other uses in the area include a movie theater and automobile dealerships to the north and JA Fair High School to the west. There are large areas of vacant office and commercially zoned property located near the site. There is vacant single- family zoned property located to the south. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received informational requests only from area residents. All abutting property owners, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Stagecoach Dodd Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. 2. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1426-A 3 3. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for multiple storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 6. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light requirements. 7. 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) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: 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 the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1426-A 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick Engineers was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposal was a revision to a previously approved preliminary plat for a tract currently zoned C-3, General Commercial District. Staff noted there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide the proposed driveway locations, the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area and the source of title of the landowner. Staff questioned if the proposed preliminary plat included the existing contours. Mr. McGetrick stated the indicated contours were the existing contours for the site. He stated previous grading had taken place along the western perimeter and the plan included the previously graded contours. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the proposed development. Staff stated hauling of fill material on or off site over municipal streets would require prior approval and all work in the right-of-way would require approval from the Arkansas State Highway Department. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the proposed driveway locations, the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area and the source of title of the landowner. The applicant is proposing the subdivision of a 30.568 acre tract into eight lots zoned C-3, General Commercial District. The ordinance requires C-3, General Commercial District zoned lots to have a minimum lot width 100 feet and contain a minimum of 14,000 square feet. The minimum lot size proposed is 150-feet by 300-feet or 1.22 acres; more than adequate to meet the minimum ordinance requirement. The applicant has also indicated a front building line of 30-feet. The ordinance typically requires a front building line of 25-feet with a 15-foot side March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1426-A 5 yard and 25-foot rear yard setback. The applicant has indicated the side yard and rear yard setbacks will conform to minimum ordinance requirements. All indicated setbacks and building lines are adequate to meet minimum ordinance requirements. The proposed preliminary plat indicates the addition of 750 liner feet of new street ending in a cul-de-sac. The site plan indicates the cul-de-sac could be extended to serve properties to the west in the future. The new street is indicated with a 60-foot right-of-way and 36-feet of pavement. The proposed street construction is consistent with commercial street construction standard. Staff is supportive of the preliminary plat as proposed. The proposed preliminary plat includes lots ranging in size from 1.22 acres to 12.94 acres; all consistent with minimum ordinance standard. A 50-foot open space buffer has been included along the southern and eastern perimeters of the proposed preliminary plat as was approved in the rezoning request. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the development should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick Engineers was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of the item to the March 17, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff stated there had been an issue raised concerning the indicated street location and previously dedicated right-of-way. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1441-B NAME: Ranch Highlands West Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on Valley Ranch Drive, North of Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: FCC Grass Farms Partnership Suite 300, Financial 3 Building Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 28.1154 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 11 FT. NEW STREET: 1000 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District PLANNING DISTRICT: 20 - Pinnacle CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow the development of Lots 7 and 8 as double frontage lots. BACKGROUND: A preliminary plat for 5.68 acres of O-3, General Office District zoned property was reviewed and approved by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their July 15, 2004, Public Hearing. A revision to expand the previously approved preliminary plat area to include 13 office zoned lots was filed for review by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their October 7, 2004, Public Hearing. The applicant withdrew his request prior to final action by the Commission. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a preliminary plat application for properties currently zoned O-3, General Office District. The applicant has indicted the March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1441-B 2 development of 28.11 acres with eleven (11) lots. The applicant has indicated an average lot size of 280-feet by 280-feet or 1.79 acres. The applicant has also indicated 1,000 linear feet of street will be added as a result of the development. The proposed preliminary plat indicates Lots 7 and 8 as double frontage lots. The applicant is seeking a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of the lots as indicated. The developer has stated the justification for the variance is the primary access to these lots will be from Valley Ranch Court and a no right of vehicle access will be platted along the rear of the lots abutting Patrick Country Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and grass covered with a scattering of trees. Valley Ranch Drive is newly constructed without sidewalks in place. Other uses in the area include a commercial node to the east including two auto repair businesses, liquor store, a restaurant, a printing company and a church. The area to the west is also vacant. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All abutting property owners, the Margeaux Place Property Owners Association, the Maywood Manor and the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 2. The standard conditions shown on the plans as "Public Works Notes" apply to the project. 3. Public Works does not support a continued deferral of street improvements to Patrick Country Road. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 5. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Valley Ranch Drive and Valley Ranch Court. 6. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 7. Any alteration of the water course will require approval from the Little Rock District of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start of work. 8. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1441-B 3 (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light requirements. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: 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 the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Water main extensions will be required in order to provide service to this property. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near the Highway 10 Express CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposed preliminary plat included the subdivision of an O-3, General Office District zoned tract into 11 lots. Staff stated the proposal would require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of double frontage lots. Staff requested the applicant provide the proposed March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1441-B 4 driveway locations and include a 50-foot building setback adjacent to the northeastern single-family lots. Staff stated the single-family lots were shallow lots. Staff stated they felt an additional buffer would be required in this area. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Staff also stated a 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way would be required at the intersection of Valley Ranch Drive and Valley Ranch Court. Staff noted a continued deferral of street improvements to Patrick Country Road would not be supported. Mr. Daters stated when a final plat for one of the lots abutting Patrick Country Road was requested, the roadway would be constructed to commercial street standard if the issue related to Patrick Country Road was not resolved. Mr. Daters stated he and the owner were working on a proposal to remove Patrick Country Road from the Master Street Plan and re-route the collector street to Valley Ranch Drive. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the proposed driveway locations on the preliminary plat. The applicant has also indicated a 30-foot undisturbed buffer and a 50-foot building setback adjacent to the northeasterly lots currently indicated and zoned for single-family. The proposed preliminary plat includes the subdivision of 28.11 acres into eleven office zoned lots. The applicant has indicated a 30-foot building line adjacent to Valley Club Drive; more than adequate to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirement (25-feet for properties zoned O-3, General Office District). The applicant has also indicated an average lot size of 280-feet by 280-feet or 1.79 acres. The lots proposed are more than adequate to meet the minimum lot size required for the current zoning or 14,000 square feet. The applicant has also indicated a new cul-de-sac street will be added. The applicant has indicated 1,000 feet of new street will be constructed to commercial street standard. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of double frontage lots. The applicant has indicated Lots 7 and 8 will be accessed from the new cul-de-sac street but will also have frontage on March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1441-B 5 Patrick Country Road. The applicant has indicated Patrick Country Road will be developed when one of the lots abutting the roadway is final platted. Staff is supportive of the indicated variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of double frontage lots and the applicant’s indicated phasing of the street construction to Patrick Country Road. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the development should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request to allow the creation of double frontage lots. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated March 2, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the time frame for the deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant’s requested deferral. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to waive the By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1477 NAME: Two Rivers Harbor Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the East end of Isbell Lane, West of County Farm Road, North of Two Rivers Park DEVELOPER: Charles Hinson 24 Isbell Lane Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Civil Design Incorporated 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 9.66 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 6 FT. NEW STREET: 2563 LF (Private) CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 – River Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 Variance/Waivers: 1. A variance to allow the development of lots with a private street. 2. A variance to allow a reduced street standard for the private street (14-feet of pavement with no curb). 3. A variance to allow the development of Lots 4 and 5 with a 15-foot front building line. The applicant is working to resolve outstanding issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant submitted a request dated February 16, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of the requested deferral to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477 2 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. James Dreher of Civil Design was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant was working to resolve outstanding issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 16, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the requested deferral to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1478 NAME: Bellevue Addition Replat Tract 1 LOCATION: Located at 7700 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Bart Sullivan 7704 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72227 ENGINEER: Keen Surveying LLC 501 Springwood Drive Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 0.30 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District and R-2, Single-family District PLANNING DISTRICT: 3 – West Little Rock CENSUS TRACT: 22.01 Variance/Waivers: A variance to allow reduced side, rear and front yard setbacks for Lots 1 and 2. The applicant is working to resolve outstanding issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant submitted a request dated February 16, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of the requested deferral to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant was working to resolve the outstanding issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 16, 2005, requesting the item be March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1478 2 deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the requested deferral to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-1479 NAME: Yarberry Place Addition Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located South of Yarberry Lane, East of Kerry Road DEVELOPER: Mr. Michael Smith #51 Westfield Court Little Rock, AR 72210 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 2.67 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 12 FT. NEW STREET: LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West CENSUS TRACT: 41.06 Variance/Waivers: A variance to allow a reduced building line for Lots 4 – 9 (15-feet). The applicant submitted a request dated February 14, 2005, requesting a deferral of this item to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. The applicant has indicated additional time is necessary to respond to comments received at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting and to look at possible revisions in the lot layout requested by the Owner/Developer. Staff is supportive of the deferral request to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick Engineers was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 14, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1479 2 Public Hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated additional time was necessary to respond to comments received at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting and to look at possible revisions in the lot layout requested by the Owner/Developer. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-1229-B NAME: Barrow Road Apartments Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: On the West side of John Barrow Road, South of Tanya Drive DEVELOPER: WTH Development 8503 Asher Avenue Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 13 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: MF-12 PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated February 4, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing to allow additional time to review the current site plan and possible revisions to the approved site plan. Staff is supportive of the deferral request to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant submitted a request dated February 4, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing to allow additional time to review the current site plan and possible January 20, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B 2 revisions to the approved site plan. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-7788 NAME: Best Park Commercial Surface Parking Lot – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: SE corner 6th and Center Streets OWNER/APPLICANT: Roman Catholic Diocese of Little Rock/Best Park, LLC PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for development of a commercial surface parking lot on this vacant, UU zoned property. 1. SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the east side of Center Street, between 6th and 7th Streets. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The site is located within the densely developed urban core of the City. Uses in the immediate vicinity include a variety of office, institutional and commercial uses. Other surface parking lots are located in the general area. The proposed parking lot is compatible with uses in the area. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Downtown and MacArthur Park Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The applicant proposes to develop the parking lot utilizing existing driveways onto Center, 6th and 7th Streets. The 65± space parking lot will be constructed with one-way drives and 60° angle stalls. The stall width and depth and driveway width comply with ordinance standards for 60° parking. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. Because of the reductions allowed for commercial parking lots by the Landscape Ordinance, the proposal submitted complies with ordinance requirements. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7788 2 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Driveway on Center Street appears to create wrong-way circulation for the proposed angle parking. Driveways on 6th and 7th Streets appear to restrict maneuverability of vehicles entering the site, due to proposed channelization. Consult Traffic Division at 379-1800 for possible re-design. 2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 3. All driveways shall be concrete aprons and shall have proper radius and grade dimensions per City Ordinance. 4. Improve corner curb radius to 25 feet radius with construction, or to some other measurement, as determined by city inspector for truck maneuverability. 5. Storm water detention will not apply to the proposed development. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. CenterPoint Energy: CenterPoint Energy has a 2-inch plastic gas main in alley running from 7th Street. Coordinate construction with CenterPoint. Southwestern Bell: No Comments received. Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the requirements for reestablishment of water service to this property. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is located on a CATA bus route. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7788 3 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 10, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item and noted the Public Works, Landscape and Utility Comments. Staff stated they would work with the applicant to address any outstanding issues. The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The Urban Use zoned property located at the SE corner of 6th and Center Streets was formerly the site of the Downtowner Hotel. The hotel was closed as a nuisance and the structure was subsequently razed. Best Park proposes to redevelop the site as a commercial surface parking lot. The new parking lot will be paved and landscaped to comply with all ordinance requirements. The parking lot may be leased in its entirety to a single entity. Within the UU district, commercial surface parking lots are allowed only as a conditional use. Staff is supportive of the requested C.U.P. The proposed parking lot is compatible with uses and zoning in the area. The site may have a better and higher use in the future, but in its current condition it only serves to act as an unsightly attractant for loitering and debris. Lighting will consist of perimeter lighting, aimed downward and into the site. If the parking lot is used entirely by one user, signage will consist of directional/informational signs at each driveway entrance. If the parking lot is to be used by the public in general, a payment box/sign will be installed. In either case, signage should be as minimal as possible to accomplish the needed purpose. Staff met with the applicant subsequent to the Subdivision Committee meeting. It was determined that some slight modification of the plan is necessary to address the circulation concerns raised by Public Works. The applicant has agreed to make those changes. It was also determined that only the corner radius at the corner of the 7th and Center Streets needed some modification. The applicant again agreed to work with staff to address the issue. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7788 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the staff report. 2. Lighting is to be aimed downward and into the site. 3. Signage is to be limited to one directional/informational sign at each entrance and, if necessary, one payment box-sign. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had failed to send notices as required by the bylaws. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferred to the March 17, 2005 Commission hearing. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-3173-D NAME: Sage Meadows Revised Long-form PD-R Revocation LOCATION: On the West side of John Barrow Road, South of Tanya Drive DEVELOPER: WTH Development 8503 Asher Avenue Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 21 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 56 FT. NEW STREET: 2910 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential at 2.66 units per acre – 56 units VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The applicant previously proposed to construct 34 buildings of multi-family housing on a 25.57 acre property located on the west side of John Barrow Road, just south of Tanya Drive. The site was zoned MF-12 (Multi-family Residential – 12 units per gross acre). The west 110 feet of the property ownership was left as R-2 zoning, when the remainder of the property was zoned, to serve as a buffer between this site and the single-family property to the west. The density proposed was under the twelve units per gross acre as allowed by the City’s Zoning Ordinance. The request was to be heard by the Planning Commission at their January 21, 1999, Public Hearing but was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the Public Hearing. On May 3, 1994, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow Four Oaks Living Center to locate on the northeast portion of the site. The facility was to be constructed with a 140 bed facility and is held under a separate ownership. This facility has been constructed. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3173-D 2 Ordinance No. 19,088 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on May 6, 2004, rezoned the site from MF-12 to PD-R to allow the development of a single-family subdivision. The applicant proposed to develop a 34-acre site as a two-part development. The site was zoned MF-12 which allowed for the development of multi- family housing at a density of 12-units per acre. The applicant indicated a desire to develop 20.64 acres as a Planned Residential Development for single-family homes and the remaining 13.16 acres as a multiple building multi-family residential development (S-1229-A). The applicant indicated the development of the PRD portion of the site with 56 units of single-family homes. The overall development plan included a clubhouse, two lakes and two playground recreational spaces. The development also contained a series of pedestrian trails connecting the multi-family and the single-family development. The clubhouse and pool would be developed as a part of a property owners association through the Planned Residential Development allowing both the single-family homes and the multi-family residents access to the facilities. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant submitted a request dated February 8, 2005, requesting the current PD-R zoning be revoked and the previous MF-12 district zoning classification be restored. The applicant has indicated the proposed single-family development will not be constructed on the site as proposed. According to the applicant the cost estimates for the single-family portion of the PD-R indicate that the project is not financially feasible. The applicant’s cover letter states the developer would “break even” at best with a tremendous amount of financial exposure. Per Section 36-454(d) the Owner may for cause request repeal of the ordinance establishing the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered sloping from the north and south to the center of the site. There is a developed nursing home located at the northeast corner of the site. Park View High School is located to the northeast of the site and single-family homes are located to the southeast. To the south of the site is an area zoned MF-24 with a welding shop and a separate building containing a contractor’s office. Single-family homes are located along West 29th Street to the south of the site. To the west of the site are also single-family homes in the Twin Lakes/Campus Place Neighborhood. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3173-D 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls in opposition of the proposed use from area residents. All residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association, the Campus Place Property Owners Association, the Twin Lakes “B” Property Owners Association, Twin Lakes B Special Improvement District and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request for the revocation of the current PRD zoning classification and the restoration of the zoning classification to MF-12. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated after review they had determined the revocation request should not be heard by the Commission. Staff stated per Section 36-454(d) the owner may file a written request with the city clerk at any time up to three years after the date of adoption of the ordinance creating the PUD. Staff stated the request shall be addressed to the Mayor and Board of Directors and set forth the cause of the repeal. Staff stated per the zoning ordinance a revocation request was to be considered by the Board of Directors and no action was required by the Planning Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: LU05-03-01 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - West Little Rock Planning District Location: 8500 Block of Rodney Parham Road Request: Single Family to Suburban Office Source: Steve and Jana Fergusen PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the West Little Rock Planning District from Single Family to Suburban Office. The Suburban Office category 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. The applicant wishes to use the existing home for an insurance office use. Staff is not expanding the application. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is developed with a single family home currently zoned R-2 (Single Family District) and is .3 acres ± in size. Rodney Parham Road runs northwest to southeast adjacent to the property and is lined with R-2 zoned land developed with single family homes northwest of this property. North and northeast of the property is additional land all zoned R-2 and developed with single family homes. Southeast of the application and fronting the Markham Street and Rodney Parham intersection is land zoned C-3 (General Commercial District) developed with a retail center with several large tenants including USA Drug, an antique store, Southern Trading and Loan, and an Office Furniture Store. A pad site is developed with a Bank of the Ozarks at the intersection. Immediately south of the site is an area zoned O-3 (General Office District) developed with a multilevel office building. Further southeast is additional C-3 Commercial at the intersection of Rodney Parham Road and Markham Street developed with a Kroger Grocery Store, a postal facility, a Jack’s outdoor equipment store, and a Red Lobster. Currently under construction at the intersection is a Burger King restaurant. Immediately west and southwest of the site is land zoned R-2 developed with single family homes. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: There have been no recent Land Use Plan Amendments in the area within the last five years. The property in question is shown as Single Family. Immediately southwest, west, northwest, north, and northeast of the property are additional area shown March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-03-01 2 as Single Family. An area of Public institutional is shown at the intersection of Rodney Parham Road and Van Lee Drive to represent a church and school. Immediately south of the property is an area shown as Office that buffers the Single Family area from a Commercial node shown on three of the four corners of the Rodney Parham and Markham Street intersection. The southeast corner of Rodney Parham Road is shown as Office. An area of Multifamily is shown southeast of the site on Markham Street as well as additional Office southeast of the Commercial area shown on Rodney Parham Road. MASTER STREET PLAN: Rodney Parham Road is shown as a Minor Arterial and Markbrook Lane is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and street and sidewalk improvements. BICYCLE PLAN: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. PARKS: This property is not located in a park service deficit area. Less than a mile southeast and northwest of this site are two parks, Kanis and Butler, respectively. Kanis Park is a 46-acre community park and Butler Park is a seven-acre Neighborhood Park. The Parks Master Plan does not show any new parks in the area but does show a potential Greenbelt along Grassy Flat Creek about a quarter mile west of the property. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-03-01 3 CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the West Markham Neighborhood Action Plan. The Land Use Goal states: “Use existing vacant structures to house new businesses so that the current commercial/residential ratio in the neighborhood is kept intact,” with an objective, “Prevent conversion of residential property into non-residential uses.” The Action statements “Limit expansion of non-residential development to areas shown as non-residential on the Future Land Use Plan,” and ”limit businesses to areas zoned for non- residential activity,” supports this objective. The Infrastructure Goal is to “Build a better and safer neighborhood with sidewalks, street lights and an adequate drainage system,” and listed several objectives and action statements related to the conditions of sidewalks in the area.” Any redevelopment in the area should help to repair existing sidewalks and fill in gaps that exist in the area. With new curbs, gutters, and sidewalks drainage, pedestrian circulation, and aesthetics could improve in the area. ANALYSIS: Overall this area has developed in a suburban fashion with multiple single-family neighborhoods and higher intensity uses at major intersections and established commercial areas along arterials. The applicant’s property is located at the edge of an established residential subdivision and fronts onto Rodney Parham Road, as do other homes nearby. Immediately south and southeast of the property are areas shown as Office and Commercial which both have a significant relationship to West Markham Street. The Midtown Center development has changed recently with the addition of Southern Trading in Loan in 2001 and USA Drug in 2003. In 2004 Construction of the Bank of the Ozarks replaced a burned out Burger King, which has now relocated to the southwest corner of Rodney Parham Road and Markham Street replacing a Texaco Service Station. These new developments and redevelopments all have access off of Rodney Parham Road and Markham Street. In the event that the subject property is shown as Suburban Office it will be the only non-residential property on Rodney Parham Road north of Markham Street that is not accessible from Markham Street. Over the last few decades this home has served as a single family residence as well as other homes located on Rodney Parham Road, a Minor Arterial, which is common development style in the West Little Rock Planning District. Similar March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-03-01 4 development patterns have occurred on nearby Markham and Mississippi Streets as well as in other places like Cantrell Road. This current pattern of development has worked for a number of years. In 1989 a similar zoning change for this particular site was requested. At that time Planning Staff did not support a change and the applicant faced opposition from the neighbors. The Planning Commission turned down the request by a vote 0 yes, 8 noes, 2 absent, and 1 abstaining. Planning Staff did not support this change because it could set an unwanted precedent for conversion of established homes fronting Rodney Parham Road to higher intensity uses. A similar amendment request was requested about a half mile west of this application at Markham and Pryor Streets in 1998. At this location single-family homes face Markham Street with a similar Office buffer between the nearby Commercial area. The Amendment called for a change from Single Family to Suburban Office to convert an existing home to an insurance office. The Planning Commission turned down the request by a vote 0 yes, 9 noes, 1 absent, and 1 abstaining. Planning Staff did not support that change in intensity because of the adjacent residential area and that Pryor Street could not adequately separate use intensities. Similarly, the current application could do the same. Showing this property as Suburban Office could lead to more intense office development on a small parcel of land and be a catalyst for additional requests in similar situations and Markbrook Lane will not be able to hold the line between intensities. For many years Single Family areas have existed adjacent to Arterials. Staff does not feel that a higher intensity use is necessary just because of its location being on an Arterial. The West Markham Neighborhood Action Plan covers this location and does not support the addition of non-residential uses to the neighborhood in areas that are not zoned appropriately. The major goal stated regarding land use is to utilize existing vacant structures and vacant big boxes for new businesses in order to maintain the current commercial-residential ratio. In an established area of town, Staff encourages the utilization of existing business properties already in the area rather than to duplicate businesses (and business structures) that may or may not be utilized. At the present time there are several vacant businesses nearby that already have the appropriate zoning and land use designation that could house this business along Rodney Parham Road and Markham Street, which would preserve the existing structure’s residential use. The action plan further suggests that new businesses do not expand into areas shown as residential. Converting this Single Family area to Suburban Office would go against a March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-03-01 5 majority of the land use goals aimed at preventing this type of conversion. The vision statement of the action plan states: “Minimize the impact of change in our neighborhood to maintain our quiet and serene neighborhood.” The conversion of this residence could create added pressure to convert other homes along Rodney Parham into similar uses and would encroach on the neighborhood immediately to the west, which could put at risk the quality of life in nearby neighborhoods. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Apache Crime Watch, Normandy-Shannon Property Owners Association, Robinwood Property Owners Association, Andover Square Residence Association, Evergreen Neighborhood Association, South Normandy Property Owners Association, Overlook Property Owners Association, Meriwether Neighborhood Association, Briarwood Neighborhood Association, Treasure Hills Neighborhood Association, Santa Fe Heights Neighborhood Association, Penbrook/Clover Hill Property Owners Association, and Sturbridge Property Owners Association. Staff has not received any comments from area residents or neighborhood associations. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate because a buffer to the Commercial area already exists, the Suburban Office Category will impede on an existing single-family neighborhood, and this change could lead to additional amendment requests along Rodney Parham Road in the future. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Donna James made a presentation of item 10.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item 10. See item 10.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Ferguson Short Form Planned Development Office. Steve Ferguson, the applicant, spoke in favor of the item and the small amount of traffic in and out of his office. He stated that it would keep its residential appeal with the baths and kitchen in place. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-03-01 6 Commissioner Floyd asked if he had approached the property owner to the south to get an access easement for vehicular traffic. Mr. Ferguson said no. Commissioner Floyd continued that this was not going to be a desirable place to live in the future and that this change made sense. Kathleen Oleson, Pulaski County League of Women Voters, stated concerns about the signage and the outwards appearance of the house. A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item failed with a vote of 4 ayes, 6 noes, and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 10.1 FILE NO.: Z-5182-A NAME: Ferguson Short-form PD-O LOCATION: Located at 8501 North Rodney Parham Road DEVELOPER: Steve Ferguson 100 North Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72205-2434 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.25 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O PROPOSED USE: Quiet Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: A request to rezone the site from R-2, Single-family to O-1, Quite Office District was denied by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their May 30, 1989, public hearing. The request was not appealed to the Little Rock Board of Directors. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a PD-O zoning classification to allow the conversion of an existing single-family structure into a quiet office uses. The applicant has indicated the property located at 8501 North Rodney Parham Road is approximately 300-feet north of the Rodney Parham and Markham Street March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5182-A 2 intersection. The applicant has stated the structure is the only residence facing Rodney Parham on the West side of the road before intersecting with Markbrook Lane. The applicant has indicated his business is a two-person Shelter Insurance office, which has been in the same location for 18 years. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation are from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant stated due to the nature and clientele of their small insurance agency, only 15 – 20 clients actually come into the office monthly. The applicant has indicated most work is done at the client’s residence or by fax and mail. The applicant has stated their intent is not to disrupt or distract from the area, but to enhance the overall appearance of the area. The applicant has indicated their interest is enhancing the look of the structure and being aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding homes. The applicant has indicated shutters and shrubs will be added to the outside of the structure adding charm and remaining a “home-like” appearance. The applicant has also indicated the structure will remain residential on the interior as well; leaving the kitchen and both bathrooms as they would be if a resident lived in the structure. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing, vacant, single-family structure. There are single- family homes abutting the site to the west, accessed from Markbrook Lane, and single-family homes located across Rodney Parham Road to the northeast. To the south of the site is a multi-story office building and to the southeast of the site is a commercial center. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Briarwood Neighborhood Association, the Pennbrook/Clover Hills Property Owners Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Rodney Parham Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. The 5' additional right-of-way will be acceptable. 2. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Add radius of 10 feet minimum for commercial access. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5182-A 3 4. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main located on site. No building construction allowed in existing easement. If frame building exists it should be removed to a location outside of the sewer easement. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #8 – the Rodney Parham Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a POD for insurance office in an existing home. A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda (File No. LU05-03-01). Master Street Plan: Rodney Parham Road is shown as a Minor Arterial and Markbrook Lane is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and street and sidewalk improvements. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5182-A 4 Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the West Markham Neighborhood Action Plan. The Land Use Goal states: “Use existing vacant structures to house new businesses so that the current commercial/residential ratio in the neighborhood is kept intact,” with an objective, “Prevent conversion of residential property into non-residential uses.” The Action statements “Limit expansion of non-residential development to areas shown as non-residential on the Future Land Use Plan,” and “limit businesses to areas zoned for non-residential activity,” supports this objective. The Infrastructure Goal is to “Build a better and safer neighborhood with sidewalks, street lights and an adequate drainage system,” and listed several objectives and action statements related to the conditions of sidewalks in the area.” Any redevelopment in the area should help to repair existing sidewalks and fill in gaps that exist in the area. With new curbs, gutters, and sidewalks drainage, pedestrian circulation, and aesthetics could improve in the area. Landscape: The plan submitted does not consistently provide for the required minimum 9-foot wide street and land use buffers. To satisfy these requirements, only three additional parking spaces could be added. A 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 sites western perimeter. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to allow the placement of an insurance office in this currently vacant single- family structure. Staff noted there were additional items necessary to complete the review process and requested the applicant provide details concerning any proposed signage, fencing and dumpster locations. Staff also requested the applicant provide the total square footage of the existing structure and dimension all building setbacks. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted Rodney Parham Road was classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial and the indicated five foot additional right-of-way dedication was acceptable. Staff also stated all curb, gutter and sidewalk that was damaged in the right-of-way would require repair or replacement prior to occupancy. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the areas did not consistently provide for the required minimum 9-foot wide street buffer. Staff March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5182-A 5 noted the area to the south was zoned O-3, which would not require a land use buffer but would require a landscape strip of six feet nine inches. Staff stated screening would be required along the western perimeter of the site adjacent to the single-family zoned properties. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign will be installed along the northern side of the driveway. The applicant has indicated the sign pole will be two feet in height and not exceed three feet by four feet in sign area. The applicant has also indicated building signage will be added to the north and south sides of the structure. The applicant has indicated the building signage will be two feet by three feet. The applicant has indicated fencing will be added to the western and southern perimeters of the site. The revised site plan indicates the fence will be constructed of wood and is proposed as a six-foot fence. The applicant has also increased the landscaped areas adjacent to Rodney Parham Road. The indicated site plan includes the placement of a minimum of ten feet of landscaping. The applicant has indicated the area to the south will maintain a six foot nine inch minimum landscaped strip, consistent with ordinance requirement. The applicant has indicated a dumpster will not be utilized on the site. The site plan includes the total square footage of the house. The existing structure contains 1208 square feet. The site plan includes the placement of four on-site parking spaces. Based on the total square footage of the structure, three parking spaces would typically be required. The applicant has also indicated building setbacks from property lines, as requested by staff. Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The site is shown as Single Family on the City’s Future Land Use Plan, which is not consistent with the applicant’s request. Although the site is located adjacent to non-residential uses to the south, there are currently single-family homes located across Rodney Parham and the site has a rear yard relationship to single-family homes to the west. Staff feels the site is a critical site in maintaining the residential fabric of the neighborhood. There are a number of homes, which have converted to office uses in the area, most of which do not have the relationship to single-family as March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5182-A 6 this structure. Staff feels this site would better serve the neighborhood as a residence. In addition, an attempt was made to rezone the site to O-1, Quiet Office in 1989 and the Commission recommended denial of the request. Staff does not feel there has been a significant change in the neighborhood that would warrant supporting this rezoning request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Mr. Steve Ferguson addressed the Commission on the merits of the proposed request. He stated his current office use was not an intense office use and only 25 new clients visited his office in the month of February. He stated most of the transactions took place via fax, e-mail or phone. He stated in some cases he would visit the client’s home to provide service. He stated his business was not in a growth mode and there were only two employees of the business. He stated the location was an appropriate location for an office use since the structure was located 50-feet from the driveway entrance a bank and office building. Mr. Ferguson stated the structure was not a desirable location for a residence. He stated residents were required to back into the travel lane of Rodney Parham Road or cross two travel lanes to enter and exit the site. He stated the site was very limited on yard space on the front and rear. Mr. Ferguson stated the structure would retain the residential character and he was not planning any modifications to the exterior of the structure. He stated only cosmetic repairs would be made and landscaping would be added to the site. He stated a fence would be placed along the western and southern property lines to screen the adjoining properties as requested by staff. He stated the indicated site plan would add three spaces to the site and allow for a turn-around so no one would be backing into the roadway. He stated since there was limited customer traffic to the site and few employees the proposed use would not generate any more traffic than a single-family residence. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her concerns were more with the character of the site. She stated she felt the site should remain residential in character and the house maintained to allow the conversion of the structure back to a residence in the future. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and if the request was limited to the applicant’s business and ownership. Staff stated the application had March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5182-A 7 not been filed to limit the site to this individual. Mr. Ferguson questioned if he would be able to sell his property in the future. The Commission stated the next owner would be required to amend the PD-O to allow them to operate a business from the site. Mr. Ferguson stated he was willing to amend his request to his ownership and business. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed signage. Staff stated the application included the placement of a ground mounted sign and two building signs. There was discussion concerning building signage versus ground mounted signage. Mr. Ferguson stated he would amend his request and limit the signage to a single ground mounted sign with a pole height of two feet and a sign area three feet by four feet. A motion was made to approve the rezoning request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-5963-E NAME: Brodie Creek Lot 101R Revised PD-R LOCATION: Located at 8 Briar Patch Court DEVELOPER: Daniel and Karen Lanehart c/o Lindsey Pools and Spas 10010 Interstate 30 Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: Marlar Engineering Co. 5018 JFK Boulevard North Little Rock, AR 72216 AREA: 0.25 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: LF CURRENT ZONING: PRD – Planned Residential Development ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PRD PROPOSED USE: Addition of an in ground pool to the site VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 16,908 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 20, 1995, established Brodie Creek Community Long-form PRD. The development included a conceptual plan for the development of 695 acres located West of Bowman Road, between Panther Creek and Olds Lane, extending to Spring Valley Manor and north to Kanis Road as a “neo-traditional” or so-called “traditional” neighborhood. The proposed development was an attempt to recapture the “flavor”, “feel”, and style of the 18th and 19th century villages in order to foster neighborliness and a sense of community. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5963-E 2 Ordinance No. 16,910 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 20, 1995, revised the previously approved PRD for the “East Neighborhood” of the Brodie Creek Community. Four neighborhoods were proposed within the conceptual development. The “East Neighborhood” was proposed as Phase I of the development of the conceptual PRD. This part of the project involved the development of 75 acres of the 695 total project tract and was located to the west of Bowman Road, between Panther Branch Creek and Olds Lane, extending west approximately ½ mile. The “East Neighborhood” was proposed with 164 building sites. The focus of the neighborhood was semicircular “green” surrounded by houses and one mixed use building, which was proposed to initially be the sales office. There were two reserved tracts along the Bowman Road frontage of the RPD site. The development included pocket parks, which were to function as shared recreational space for neighbors. The development plan changed when a second developer purchased properties to the west of this area from the original developer. The second developer desired to develop the area as a traditional single-family neighborhood and not the planned community as was previously proposed. The new development is known as Woodlands Edge. Ordinance No. 18, 518 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 3, 2001, revoked a portion (205 acres) of the PRD zoning classification restoring the R-2, Single- family zoning classification. On January 6, 2004, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,012 revoking the PRD zoning classification for an additional 70 acres restoring the original R-2, Single-family zoning. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved PRD to allow the placement of a 19-foot by 33-foot in-ground pool on this existing single-family lot. The applicant is also proposing the placement of a six-foot solid faced fence beyond the required 20-foot building setback to screen the pool area. The addition of a pool structure is an accessory use and the provision for accessory uses such as pools and storage buildings was not addressed in the approval of the original PRD. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing two story single-family residences. The area the applicant is proposing, as the pool site is a side yard abutting Briar Patch Court. Brodie Creek has developed with single-family homes and currently there are homes located to the north, south and east of the site. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5963-E 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several information phone calls from area residents most of which indicating support or remaining neutral for the proposed request. The Brodie Creek Property Owners Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a PRD (Planned Residential Development) for the addition of a pool. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Briar Patch Court is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Briar Patch Court will not be affected by this application. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5963-E 4 Bicycle Plan: A proposed Class I Bikeway is shown north of the site following Panther Branch Creek. A Class I Bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. This application will not affect the proposed Bikeway. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff stated there were no remaining technical issues associated with the proposed request. Staff noted the proposed request to the committee members present. There was no further discussion of the item and the committee then forwarded the item to the full commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There was not a response necessary from the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request includes a revision to the previously approved PRD to allow the placement of a 19-foot by 33-foot in-ground pool on this existing single-family lot. The applicant is also proposing the placement of a six-foot solid faced wood fence beyond the required 20-foot building setback to screen the pool area. Staff is supportive of the request. The addition of a pool structure is an accessory use and the provision for accessory uses such as pools and storage buildings was not addressed in the approval of the original PRD. The Architectural Review Committee for Brodie Creek has reviewed the request and has recommended approval of the applicant’s proposed design and placement. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff does not feel the placement of the pool and fencing on the site will have a significant impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5963-E 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 1 ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: LU05-20-03 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Pinnacle Planning District Location: Northwest Corner of Highway 10 and Little Rock Christian Academy Entrance Request: Single Family to Mixed Office Commercial Source: Casche Carter, Crofton, Tull, and Associates, Inc. The applicant requested to defer the item on Tuesday February 14, 2005. Staff Supports this deferral request to the April 14, 2005 Agenda. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the April 14, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 12.1 FILE NO.: Z-6079-F NAME: Muewly Long-form POD LOCATION: Located at the Northwest corner of Highway 10 and the entrance to Little Rock Christian Academy DEVELOPER: Highway 10 Real Estate, LLC 11601 Pleasant Ridge Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: Crafton, Tull and Associates, Inc. 10825 Financial Centre Parkway, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 19.34 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: 60% office, 40% commercial uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated February 16, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, public hearing. The applicant has indicated additional time is necessary to respond to Subdivision Committee comments and determine the final layout. Staff is supportive of the requested deferral to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6079-F 2 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Mark Rickett of Crafton Tull and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 16, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, public hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated additional time was necessary to respond to the Subdivision Committee comments and to determine the final lot layout. Staff stated they were supportive of the requested deferral to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-6932-B NAME: Arkansas Association of Nigerians Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 9802 Geyer Springs Road DEVELOPER: Arkansas Association of Nigerians P.O. Box 1925 Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.43 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: Revised PCD ALLOWED USES: Specified C-3, General Commercial District Uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Add fraternal organization to allowable uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The property at 9802 Geyer Springs Road contains a 2,400 square foot commercial building and paved parking lot that were constructed prior to the property being annexed into the City in 1980. The structure was built as a convenience store with gas pumps in the 1970’s. Subsequent to the convenience store closing, the building has housed a procession of commercial uses including a restaurant, a bar and a pawnshop. When the property was annexed into the City, it was zoned R-2 and rendered nonconforming. The nonconforming C-3 status was maintained by the continuous occupancy of the site by the commercial uses. On December 12, 2000, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,394 rezoning the site from R-2, Single-family to PCD. The approved March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6932-B 2 PCD utilized the existing as-built survey as the site plan and limited the uses of the property to a specific list of uses proposed by the applicant. The approved PCD expressly prohibited any alcoholic beverage sales from the property. The following listed uses were approved uses for the site: Antique shop, Appliance repair, Barber and beauty shop, Cabinet and woodwork shop, Clothing store, Day nursery or day care center, Convenience store with gas pumps, Food store, Hobby shop, Key shop, Pawn shop, Photography studio, Secondhand store, Tool and equipment rental (inside only). Ordinance No. 18,536 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 21, 2001, revised the previously approved PCD to allow the addition of eating place, inside to the permitted uses allowed for the site. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now requesting to amend the previously approved PCD to add fraternal organization to the allowable uses for the site. The Arkansas Association of Nigerians has recently purchased the site and is requesting to utilize the site for their weekly meetings. The applicant is requesting all previously approved uses continue to be allowable alternative uses for the site. The applicant’s cover letter indicates the membership is a non-profit organization and intends to utilize the property as a cultural center. The applicant has indicated the building will also be used for educational purposes, with speakers coming from all over the world. The applicant is not proposing any exterior modifications. The site contains a twenty (20) space parking lot, which will be re- striped. The applicant has indicated signage will remain as was previously approved or signage as allowed in commercial zones. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is located on the west side of Geyer Springs Road, several blocks south of Baseline Road. Several tracts of undeveloped land and a developed residential neighborhood characterize the immediate area. The properties adjacent to the north and west are undeveloped and zoned R-2, Single-family. There is a church to the south. To the east of the site, across Geyer Springs Road, is a single-family subdivision and an apartment complex. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, the OUR Neighborhood Association, the Santa Monica Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6932-B 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Except for re-paving or re-striping the parking lot, no re-development of the site is apparently proposed. With re-design of parking lot, driveway width must not exceed 36 feet. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Geyer Springs West Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Park / Open Space and Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) for use of an existing building as a meeting place for a fraternal organization. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Geyer Springs Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. Geyer Springs Road may require dedication of right-of-way and street and sidewalk improvements. Bicycle Plan: A Class III Bikeway is shown along Valley Drive and on the proposed Valley Drive extension west. A Class III Bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. This application will not affect the proposed bikeway. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6932-B 4 City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Cloverdale-Watson Neighborhood Action Plan. The Economic Goal listed one objective relevant to this case: “Retain existing businesses and when necessary find new businesses to replace those which close.” Since this building was once a convenience store and pawnshop the reuse is consistent with the neighborhood action plan. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff stated there were no remaining technical issues associated with the proposed request. Staff noted the proposed request to the committee members present. There was no further discussion of the item and the committee then forwarded the item to the full commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant is now requesting to amend the previously approved PCD to add fraternal organization to the allowable uses for the site and to allow all the previously approved uses to continue as allowable alternative uses for the site. The Arkansas Association of Nigerians has recently purchased the site and is requesting to utilize the site for their weekly meetings. The applicant has indicated the building will also be used for educational purposes, with speakers coming from all over the world. The applicant is not proposing any exterior modifications. The site contains a twenty (20) space parking lot, which will be re-striped. The applicant has also indicated signage will remain as was previously approved. The previous approval included signage as allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of 36- feet in height and 160 square feet in area. Staff does not feel the use of the site as requested by the applicant for a non- profit organization as a fraternal organization meeting facility and cultural center will have a significant impact on the area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6932-B 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-6985-A NAME: Fletcher Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 8121 Jamison Road DEVELOPER: Erica Fletcher 8121 Jamison Road Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: acres NUMBER OF LOTS: FT. NEW STREET: LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family with a CUP for a manufactured home ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Single chair beauty salon VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant is working to resolve outstanding issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant was working to resolve outstanding issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a of March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6985-A 2 recommendation deferral to the Commission. Staff requested the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: LU05-01-01 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District Location: Cantrell Road between Taylor Loop and Pinnacle Valley Roads Request: Transition to Commercial Source: John Rees, Rees Development On February 23, 2005, the applicant contacted Staff and asked to withdraw the application. Staff recommends withdrawal. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 15.1 FILE NO.: Z-7500-A NAME: Rees Development Long-form PCD LOCATION: North of Cantrell Road, West of Pinnacle Valley Road DEVELOPER: Rees Development Company 12115 Hinson Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 24.37 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Commercial, Office/Warehouse PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Commercial VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated February 18, 2005, requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff is supportive of the withdrawal request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick Engineers was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 18, 2005, requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff stated they were supportive of the withdrawal request. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7500-A 2 There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: LU05-04-01 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Heights Hillcrest Planning District Location: 700 block of North University Avenue Request: Office to Mixed Use Source: Development and Construction Management, Inc. PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District from Office to Mixed Use. The Mixed Use category 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. The applicant requests to construct 44 condominiums and an unspecified office use within one section of one of the structures. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the entire half block to make the area more logical. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is developed with a small single family home zoned R-5 (Urban Residence District) and 1.74 acres ± in size. Just southwest of the property is land zoned R-2 (Single Family District) with a CUP for a Catholic school. Northeast of the site on H Street is additional R-2 land with a CUP for an elementary school. Northwest of the site are two separate parcels of land zoned R-5 (Urban Residence District) developed with single family homes, apartments, and a parking lot. Immediately north of the site is land zoned O-3 (General Office District) and developed with several office buildings. Further north is a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) for an office and land zoned O-2 (Office an Institutional District) and O-3 developed with a school and offices, respectively. Immediately west of the site is land zoned R-3 (Single Family District) and developed with single family homes on a typical urban street grid. Immediately south of the property is additional land zoned R-5 and O-3 developed with a single family home and an office. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-04-01 2 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On May 18, 2003 a change was made from Multi Family and Office to Community Shopping less than a half mile south of the site at the northeast corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue. On March 5, 2002 a change was made from Commercial and Office to Mixed Use on the northwest corner of University Avenue and West Markham Street, less than a half mile south of the site to allow flexibility of uses for future development. On June 20, 2000 a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office approximately one quarter of a mile southeast of the application at the 200 block of N. McKinley Street to accommodate proposed development. On March 16, 1999 multiple changes were made from Office and Multifamily to Single Family, Multifamily, Mixed Use, and Office within a half-mile radius southeast of the applicant’s property for future development and to recognize existing conditions. An area of Office parallels the east side of University Avenue from H Street to C Street, which includes the applicant’s property. North of H Street is an area shown as Public Institutional. At the northeast corner of Evergreen Street and University are areas shown as Park / Open Space, Office, Low Density Residential, Single Family, and Multifamily. The area immediately west of the application is shown as Single Family. South of the site, between Lee Street and West Markham Street, along University Avenue are higher intensity uses including Mixed Use, Multi Family, and Community Shopping. At the southwest corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue is an area shown as Commercial, the southeast corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue is shown as Public Institutional. Southwest of the site, and fronting University Avenue, is additional area shown as Public Institutional. West of the applicant’s property are areas shown as Office, Multifamily, and Single Family fronting both H Street and University Avenue. Northwest of the site is an area of Office fronting University with an area of Park / Open Space and Multifamily behind. MASTER STREET PLAN: University Avenue is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan with special design standards south of the site between Lee and Markham Streets, March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-04-01 3 which indicate a 100-foot right of way. Adjacent to the site University Avenue has a median separating northbound and southbound traffic. Southbound University Avenue traffic will not access this site directly, nor will traffic be able to leave this site in the southbound University Avenue direction unless a median cut is approved. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on University Avenue since it is a Principal Arterial. Additional improvements and right of way may be required for acceleration and deceleration lanes since this section of University Avenue has a significant hill. BICYCLE PLAN: A Class III bikeway is shown on H Street north of the site. 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. This bikeway will not be affected by this project. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows the War Memorial Park located two blocks east of the application area on the south side of W. Markham Street. The plan describes War Memorial Park as providing special facilities such as the zoo, fitness center, and a golf course designed to serve the entire city. This amendment is not likely to affect the large facilities at War Memorial Park. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal lists one objective related to this application. The objective is to recreate a neighborhood that is a pleasant place to work and live, and to preserve the net number of residential units by not demolishing them or converting them to other uses. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-04-01 4 ANALYSIS: The applicant has applied for a change to Mixed Use for a mixed office and residential development. Since the area is already shown as Office, the office component of the development is consistent with the current plan and Staff has no problem with the office component of this development. In addition to the office component that exists under the current land use category, the Mixed Use category allows both residential and commercial development. The Mixed Use category can lead to sound development that can commingle the different uses into an area. The category allows for residential development similar to that of the Multifamily land use category. Near this site are several areas of higher density housing that are shown as either Multifamily or Low Density Residential which are developed with a mixture of duplexes, apartment buildings, and a few single family homes. Since areas intended for higher density development have developed, a need for additional higher density residential may be needed in the area. Since the Mixed Use category provides for higher density residential development, it could facilitate future demand, and relieve possible pressure to intensify nearby neighborhoods. Introduction of possible higher density residential at this location could provide a buffer between single family homes on Buchanan and G Streets and offices and traffic on University Avenue. Also the residential aspect would allow for densification along University Avenue. Central Arkansas Transit Authority operates Route 21 adjacent to this site and can provide access to downtown, University Mall, and the University of Arkansas campus for area residents. Even though the current application does not involve any commercial activity, the Mixed Use category does allow it. Currently, commercial activities in the area are located in areas shown as Mixed Use about a quarter mile south of the site in the vicinity of “B” and “C” Streets, the Park Plaza Shopping Center at the northwest corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue, a Community Shopping area shown at the northeast corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue, and a large Commercial area at the southeast corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue. Additional Commercial is shown in the Heights Shopping District approximately three quarter miles north of the site near University Avenue and R Street. The nearby area around this site consists of mostly institutional, office, and residential uses, and addition of commercial development could create pressure to convert additional area properties to commercial which could harm the quality of life of nearby residential areas. Staff doesn’t feel that the addition of commercial that the Mixed Use category allows would be appropriate at this location, because of the established neighborhood, the institutional and office uses nearby, and that space for commercial March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-04-01 5 development is available nearby. Since University Avenue is a Principal Arterial, and is constructed with a median separating northbound and southbound traffic, Staff recommends that any development on this site does not impede traffic flow. Access to this development should only be right turn in, right turn out to maintain the existing median and prevent conflicts caused by traffic crossing a Principal Arterial. Since the Mixed Use category allows commercial activity, traffic entering and leaving the site could be greater than the levels anticipated for the office and residential components available in the category. Current traffic flows on University Avenue could be hindered if any commercial aspect develops on the site in the future. In 2001 the Urban Land Institute (ULI) did a study of the West Markham Street - University Avenue area which included this site. The study made recommendations regarding new development: should preserve the integrity nearby residential areas, provide a visible identity, and improve pedestrian safety. The recommendations of the ULI study are similar to the wishes of the neighborhood action plan to preserve the quality of life in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the ULI study identified a town center concept at the West Markham Street - University Avenue intersection. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Forest Park Neighborhood Association, Heights Neighborhood Association, Prospect Terrace Neighborhood Association, Sherrill Heights Garden Club, Briarwood Neighborhood Association, Evergreen Neighborhood Association, Meriwether Neighborhood Association, Normandy-Shannon Property Owners Association, South Normandy Property Owners Association, and the University Park Neighborhood Association. Staff has not received any comments from area residents or neighborhood associations. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. Staff feels that the office and residential components of the proposed development are consistent with the ULI Study statement, but does not support the commercial aspect the Mixed Use category makes available. Staff believes that commercial activities are more appropriate at the University Avenue and West Markham Street intersection or the Heights Shopping District. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-04-01 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant requested the application be deferred to the March 17, 2005 Agenda. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 16.1 FILE NO.: Z-7563 NAME: University Park Short-form PD-R LOCATION: 715 North University Avenue DEVELOPER: University Park LLC 20 Hunters Green Circle Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: ETC Engineers 1510 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 1.74 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-5, Urban Residential District ALLOWED USES: High Density Residential Units of not more than 36-units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Multi-family Condominium Development with a portion of the development being held for office development VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request to rezone the site from R-5, Urban Residential District to POD at their April 8, 2004, Public Hearing. The applicant proposed the placement of a two-story office building consisting of 18,000 square feet of general and professional office uses with provisions for some light commercial uses should they fit with office occupancy. The proposed site plan included fifty-nine on-site parking spaces. The applicant requested allowance of 25 percent of the gross floor area (4,500 square feet) to be utilized by the following listed uses: Barber/Beauty Shop, Book and March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 2 Stationary Store, Drugstore, Florist, Optic Shop, Clothing, Hobby Shop, Jewelry, or Tailor Shop. Included in the filing was a petition for abandonment of Grant Street and “G” Street. Grant Street was not previously constructed and ends at the intersection of “F” Street. The applicant proposed an extension of Grant Street approximately 120 feet from “F” Street to the property line creating adequate turn around in the parking lot for emergency vehicles. The applicant amended his request at the April 8, 2004, Public Hearing to remove the connection of Grant Street from “F” Street into the development. Access to the development was to only be provided from University Avenue. The applicant withdrew his request for rezoning prior to Board of Directors action at their July 22, 2004, Public Hearing. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: This applicant now proposes to develop this site as a condominium complex. The project consists of 1.74 acres of land on the East side of University Avenue. The project has forty-four condominium homes along with a clubhouse/workout area. The property has 20 -1 bedroom units in three different floor plans and 18 - 2 bedroom units with three floor plans and 6 - 3 bedroom units. The applicant has indicated there is room for a few garages, along with covered parking and storage areas for all the residents under the proposed parking deck. The applicant has also indicated a portion of the site will be utilized as office space for general and professional office uses. The applicant is requesting to abandon Grant Street inside the property boundary and G Street where it abuts the property. The applicant has indicated the exterior of the homes will be constructed with 100 percent brick and with long lasting vinyl trim. Windows and patio doors are vinyl with insulated glass. A full insulation package will include R-30 in ceilings, R-13 in exterior walls and R-11 between the units. The roof is proposed as shingles with a twenty-year guarantee. The proposal also includes interior amenities to include nine-foot ceilings, crown mold, marble vanities, spa tubs, tile entrances and elevators along with many other quality interior and outdoor amenities. The applicant has indicated the clubhouse will be constructed in a later phase. Amenities within the clubhouse pool facility include a business center in addition to fitness equipment. A color copier and a fax machine will be included within the business center along with a meeting room. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 3 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property now consists of twelve residentially zoned lots in Blocks 9 and 10 of the Lincoln Park Subdivision and a portion of Grant Street, which has never been constructed. The property is bounded by University Avenue to the west, “G” Street (not constructed) to the north, a closed alley to the east, and a dwelling and small office building to the south. Steep grades to the east and north lead down to a drainage canal. University Avenue is constructed with a median without a break at this location. An abandoned house with a stone exterior currently sits on the site. There is not an existing driveway location on University Avenue accessing the site. Frontage along University Avenue is predominantly occupied by office and commercial uses, with a few remaining single-family dwellings. To the east of the site are residential uses adjacent to the drainage canal. Other uses in the area include the Catholic Boys School a strip retail center and a public library. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association, Evergreen Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 2. University Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 3. The previous land owner placed and un-authorized fill in the regulated floodway of Coleman Creek. A large portion of the site is within the mapped floodway and floodplain. Show the regulated floodway on the site plan. Fill must be removed from the floodway, or a letter of map revision obtained from FEMA. 4. All fill slopes must conform to the land alteration ordinance. Slopes must be at 3:1 or terraced with erosion protection. For architectural stone facing, wall up to 15' high with 10' bench is acceptable. Provide a grading and drainage plan showing improvements. 5. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to any construction. Approval from the Little Rock District of the Corps of Engineers may also be required. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 4 6. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required on University in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1800 for requirements on driveway construction and any frontage improvements. 7. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 8. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 9. The minimum Finish Floor elevation based on FEMA flood study is required to be shown on plat and grading plans. 10. 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. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer mains on the site. Revise plans to show sewer mains and existing easements. No construction will be allowed within the sewer easements unless sewer main is relocated at the Developer’s expense. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met before service is resumed. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine the location of public and/or private fire hydrant(s) that will be required. A water main extension and additional fire hydrant(s) will be installed at the Developer's expense. 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. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Maintain a 20-foot access and a 20-foot wide gate opening on the south and west sides of the development. Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 5 County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near the University Avenue Bus Route (#21) and the Rodney Parham Bus Route (#8). F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a PRD (Planned Residential Development) for 44 condominiums and an unspecified office use on 1.74 acres of land. A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (File No. LU05-04-01). Master Street Plan: University Avenue is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan with special design standards south of the site between Lee and Markham Streets, which indicate a 100-foot right of way. Adjacent to the site University Avenue has a median separating northbound and southbound traffic. Southbound University Avenue traffic will not access this site directly, nor will traffic be able to leave this site in the southbound University Avenue direction. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on University Avenue since it is a Principal Arterial. Additional improvements and right of way may be required for acceleration and deceleration lanes since this section of University Avenue has a significant hill. Bicycle Plan: A Class III Bikeway is shown on H Street north of the site. 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. This Bikeway will not be affected by this project. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal lists one objective related to this application. The objective is to recreate a neighborhood that is a pleasant place to work and live, and to preserve the net number of residential units by not demolishing them or converting them to other uses. Landscape: The on-site street buffer along North University Avenue should have an average width of 15 feet. At no point should this width be less than 7 ½ feet. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 6 The width of the land use buffer along the southern perimeter where adjacent to residential property should average at least 9 ½ feet. The eastern land use buffer width should average 15-feet in width. The plan submitted is not always clear concerning landscape and buffer widths. A total of six percent of the interior of the vehicular use areas must be landscaped with interior islands of at least 112 square feet in area and 5.6 feet in width. A small amount of building landscaping between public parking areas and the building is required. There is considerable flexibility with this requirement. All of these requirements take into account the reductions allowed within the designated mature area of the city. A 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 and southern perimeters where adjacent to residential properties. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposed development included construction of a condominium development with a portion of the site utilized as office space. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the location of the non-residential and the total square footage designated as non-residential. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a portion of the site was located in the floodway. Staff stated a previous owner had filled illegally in the floodway and prior to approval the fill from this area should be removed. Staff also stated details of the proposed terracing along the eastern property line would be required. Staff noted with a previous application the property owner to the east had requested plantings on the benches to break the massing of the wall. Staff requested a grading plan and cross section to ensure compliance with existing ordinances. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening would be required adjacent to single-family zoned or used property. Staff stated the southern buffer should average 9 ½ feet and the eastern buffer should average March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 7 15-feet. Staff noted interior vehicular use areas should be landscaped with interior islands of at least 112 square feet in area. There was a general discussion concerning access to the site. The applicant indicated access to the site would be from University Avenue with an emergency access provided from Grant Street to the south. Staff questioned if the applicant had contacted the property owner to the south of the proposed development. The applicant stated he had not contacted the property owner to the south of the site to apprise him of the proposed development plans. Staff encouraged the applicant to contact the property owner in the near future to discuss with him the proposed development and access to the site. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated no more than 10,000 square feet would be utilized as general and professional office space. This would leave approximately 30,000 square feet for residential units. The applicant has indicated the site will contain a total of 44 units. The site plan indicates 20- 1 bedroom 1 bath, 16- 2 bedroom 2 bath and 8- 3 bedroom 2 ½ baths. The office uses will be contained within the same footprint as the residential units. The applicant has indicated the offices uses will be limited to Buildings 1 and 2. Buildings three and four are two and three story buildings with parking on the bottom floor and residential on the remaining floors. Buildings one and two are two story buildings with residential and office. The applicant has indicated 78 parking spaces. The site plan includes 21 open air spaces, six handicapped spaces and 51 under deck spaces. The office portion of the proposed development would typically require 25 parking spaces and the residential portion would 49 parking spaces or a total of 74 parking spaces. The indicated parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum parking requirement for the indicated uses. The applicant has indicated a single-ground mounted sign will be installed along University Avenue. The applicant has indicated the sign will be consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The applicant has indicated potential office users and the residential development will share the proposed sign. The applicant has also March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 8 indicated a small plaque will be added to the units housing the potential office users. The applicant has indicated the signage will be no more than ten percent of the unit’s façade area. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated signage plan. The applicant has indicated screening will be installed adjacent to properties zoned or used as residential. The applicant has also indicated landscaping will be added to the interior of the site consistent with ordinance requirements. The applicant has indicated the fill located within the floodway will be removed prior to development. The applicant has also indicated retaining walls, consistent with ordinance requirement with regard to height and landscaping, will be added to stabilize the site. The applicant has indicated a detailed grading plan will be provided to staff prior to development. The applicant is requesting the closure of Grant Street and G Street within the proposed development. Both streets were indicated as right-of-way when the area was final platted but were never constructed. The applicant has indicated an emergency access gate entering the site from Grant Street to the south but is not proposing to access the site from the south. The applicant has indicated the development will not be a gated development and is proposing only one entrance, from University Avenue. Staff is supportive of the proposed development. The applicant has indicated the development of the site as a condominium complex with limited office uses. The applicant has indicated parking sufficient to meet the minimum parking required for the indicated uses. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels if the development is constructed as proposed there should be minimal impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions: 1. Compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. 2. The 10,000 square feet of general and professional office uses are to be located in Buildings I and II. Staff recommends approval of the requested abandonment of “G” Street where abutting the site and Grant Street within the site. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563 9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had filed to notify property owners as required by the Planning Commission By-laws. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the March 17, 2005, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-7665-A NAME: Rock Haven Revised Short-form PD-R LOCATION: Located at 1000 Kirby Road DEVELOPER: Rock Haven Properties 700 East 9th Street 10M Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: Development Consultants, Inc. 2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220 Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 4.158 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 22 FT. NEW STREET: 1590 LF CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential – the allowance of an RV to locate on the site to serve as a security/sales office for the proposed development. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed this request at their July 15, 2004, Public Hearing and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Board of Directors. Ordinance No. 19,164 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 17, 2004, established the Rock Haven Short-form PD-R. The proposed development was designed based on a concept blended between a zero lot line subdivision and a horizontal property regime. The lots were to be minimally sized to accommodate buildable surface areas between 1500 and 2450 square feet on each lot. Homes were March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7665-A 2 proposed with a two-story height maximum. The bill of assurance was indicated to prescribe minimum and maximum home sizes, as well as controls for architectural quality that would be administered by an architectural review committee. Each buildable area was set within one foot of one lot line, and fourteen to fifteen feet from the other to allow for a small side yard area. All homes would have enclosed garages located at the rear of the structure and entered from the looped drive. Homes would front on the interior common park area. The proposed access to lots was accomplished with a private drive that encircled the property and was within a common access and utility easement area. This easement was proposed as a part of the large Lot 1 area, which comprised all of the land not contained within the residential lots. All improvements and land within Lot 1 would be held in common ownership by the property owners association and would also be maintained by the property owners association. The property owners association would also maintain individual lot area landscaping. The applicant indicated Tract A as a separate parcel containing 1.91 acres. The applicant indicated Tract A would be reserved for future development. The applicant requested a deferral of required street improvements to Kirby Road until development occurred for proposed Tract A. The applicant indicated phasing would be utilized for the development. Phase I was to consist of the development of Lots 1 – 11 including all required street improvements and infrastructure. Phase II would consist of the completion of the access easement located within Lot 1 and Lots 12 – 22. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the previously approved PRD for the new subdivision to allow the use of an RV as a temporary sales, construction management and security office on the construction site. The applicant’s cover letter states soon after purchasing the land, there were multiple cases of trash and limb debris dumping on the land, along with thefts on the site and an adjacent residence. The applicant states they explored various security solutions and ultimately determined to locate temporarily on the site. The applicant states this would allow them to monitor and manage the construction progress most effectively. The applicant states the sooner they complete their objective – unique, quaint neighborhood and park – the better for the area. The applicant also states they foresee the need to conduct sales of lots in the temporary office. The applicant states interest in the future neighborhood has already proven to be great. He states the feedback they have received on all the plans and the temporary office has been positive. The applicant’s cover letter states no sewage service is available (either on the site or the surrounding area); most types of temporary buildings were not an option. He states given the needs, they located a Newmar Northern Star Luxury March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7665-A 3 Coach RV featuring substantial water and sewer capacity. He states the RV enables them to stay on site with visits to an area park or travel center with water and sewage servicing every three or four weeks. The applicant states they anticipate utilizing the temporary facility in two locations. The applicant has indicated location B1 will be utilized for four to seven months, and then an additional four to seven months in location B2 while completing initial development and construction of their new home in the neighborhood. A portion of the site is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the property, which would prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and clearing of underbrush was previously completed. There are residential uses located to the east of the site both site built and manufactured homes. To the south of the site is a vacant C-1 zoned property. To the west of the site is vacant R-2, Single-family zoned property. Kirby Road is a narrow unimproved road with open ditches for drainage. Only a portion of the site lies within the City limits. Annexation will be required prior to development. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, Staff has received one phone call from an area resident. The Parkway Place Property Owners Association, Spring Valley Manor Neighborhood Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. No comments on temporary use of site for RV hook-up. All previous comments on the PRD apply. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside service boundary. If annexed into the City of Little Rock, no pump station will be allowed. A sewer main extension will be required, with easements. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7665-A 4 Entergy: A 10-foot under ground utility easement is required or a 30-foot overhead facility easement is required. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional information. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: 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 water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. Water service is not available to this property without approval of the City of Little Rock. The Little Rock Fire Department will need to approve the fire hydrant locations and vehicular access to all parcels. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a PRD (Planned Residential Development) to allow a recreational vehicle to be placed on the lot at two different locations during development, for security and to house a sales office. Since the addition of the security and office use is only temporary, the request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Kirby Road is shown as a Collector on the Master Street and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. Bicycle Plan: A Class III bikeway is shown on Kirby Road adjacent to the property. 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. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7665-A 5 City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The change in this zoning case is relatively small and scale and no objectives directly relate to this case. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff noted the proposal was approved by the Commission in July 2004, for the development of a single- family subdivision. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting the placement of a RV on the site to serve as his residence, a sales office and a security office. Staff stated the site plan included two locations for the proposed RV to be located, one for the short term and the second when the subdivision began developing. Staff questioned the applicant concerning the previously approved development and when the applicant anticipated the development beginning construction. The applicant stated the annexation request had been approved by the County and would soon be filed with the City. The applicant stated the engineering firm was 90 percent complete with the plans for development and anticipated construction would begin within 90 to 120 days of completion of the plans. The applicant stated sewer was the primary obstacle. He stated the estimated cost of extending the sewer line to serve the site was $100,000.00. He stated the engineer was working with the sewer department for alternatives. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting to place an RV on the site to act as a sales/security office and residence while the proposed Rock Haven Subdivision is being constructed. The applicant has indicated two locations for the proposed parking of the RV unit. The applicant has indicated the RV unit will be located near the southern property line until actual construction of the subdivision begins and then moved to the northern boundary. The applicant has indicated his home will be the first to begin construction and once drives are placed to begin the development, the RV unit will be relocated nearer the applicant’s new home. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7665-A 6 Per the zoning ordinance, temporary buildings are allowable when incidental to construction on a site or development of a residential subdivision. The units allowed are temporary buildings, mobile homes or manufactured homes and may be allowed for a period of one year by action of the Director of Planning. There is not a provision in the ordinance for the placement of an RV to serve the same purpose. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to place the RV unit on the site to serve as a sales/security office but would recommend the RV unit not be allowed until construction of the subdivision begins. There are several issues that need to be resolved prior to beginning construction of the proposed subdivision. Wastewater is one issue that needs resolving. The applicant must apply for and be annexed into the corporate limits of the City to received sewer service. The applicant has indicated the annexation has been approved by the County but has not yet been filed with the City. The earliest possible Board of Directors approval date would be May 17, 2005. In addition, sewer lines must be extended to the site prior to the start of construction on the new homes. Staff feels a more defined construction schedule should be established and construction should be imminent prior to the RV unit being allowed on the site so the use can be as intended in the ordinance or a sales, security office. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Roy Stephens was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the current request. Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant being able to place the RV unit on the site to serve as a security/sales office but staff felt a more definite construction schedule should be established. Mr. Stephens addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated the County had approved the annexation request and the engineer was 90 percent complete with construction plans. He stated he felt construction would begin in 60 to 90 days. Ms. Lenice Garrison addressed the Commission with concerns. She stated her concerns were with a more definite construction schedule. She stated the neighborhood was not necessarily opposed to the placement of the RV on the site to be used as a sales/security office but the question was how long would the RV unit be located on the site. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7665-A 7 There was a general discussion concerning the applicant’s request and staff’s concerns. Staff stated the earliest the annexation request could be before the Board of Directors was late May. Staff stated their concern was there were no firm dates tied to a proposed development schedule. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and if the construction could begin on the portion of the site within the City limits. Staff stated the current approvals would not allow them to begin construction prior to annexation. The Commission made a motion to approved the applicant’s request provided the applicant request annexation by the March 21, 2005, filing deadline to be heard by the Commission at their April 28, 2005, public hearing. The Commission also requested the current zoning application be held until after the annexation request was heard by the Commission to allow both item to be forwarded to the Board of Directors at the same time. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-7786 NAME: Dennis Properties Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 11421 Stagecoach Road DEVELOPER: Dennis Properties LLC 2791 Hilldale Road Alexander, AR 72202 ENGINEER: Black Corley and Owens, PA Architects 219 West South Street Benton, AR 72015 AREA: 20.074 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Office, Showroom with Warehouse (with retail sales enclosed) VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the rezoning of the site located at 11421 Stagecoach Road from R-2, Single-family to PCD to allow the development of an office/warehouse development on the site. The site plan includes the development of two buildings in two phases with 29,688 square feet of office/warehouse in the first phase and 39,688 square feet in Phase 2. The buildings are proposed as metal buildings with a glass office entry door and warehouse entry of overhead door in the front and in the rear of the buildings for each unit. There will be rear access to the building. The office will consist of office areas, small kitchen area and bathroom facilities. The warehouse area will March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 2 have bathrooms as well. The applicant has indicated the project is designed to provide high visibility, high accessibility and great curb appeal for business. All units will face Stagecoach Road and will have large parking areas and large areas for business vehicles to access the front and back of the building for material pick up or delivery. The sizes of the rental units will vary depending on the tenant’s need. The applicant has indicated the proposed development is not located in a subdivision and there is not a bill of assurance in effect for the property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and grass covered. Stagecoach Road is a two lane state highway adjacent to the site with open ditches for drainage. The eastern portion of the site is located in the floodway and a large power transmission line is located in this area. To the west of the site is an apartment development and southwest of the site is a city park. Other uses in the area include residential and non-residential uses. There is a new strip center and mini-warehouse development currently under construction located to the northwest of the site and a new church is proposed immediately north of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, the Otter Creek Homeowners Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Stagecoach Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 4. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. The project would qualify for a contribution in-lieu of construction at the time of the building permit. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 3 6. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 7. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 8. Regulatory floodway passes through part of the Phase 1 building. Per Section 36-341(e), no structure is permitted in a floodway. Show the current floodway line on the plans. Any proposed modification of the floodway will require flood map revisions. Obtain conditional approval from Public Works and the FEMA prior to site approval. 9. The minimum Finish Floor elevation as determined by the FEMA flood study is required to be shown on plat and grading plans. 10. 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. 11. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 12. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The site would be limited to one driveway placed near the center of the property. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main located on the site. No building construction will be allowed within the sewer easements. No retaining wall construction will be allowed within the existing sewer easement. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. 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 March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 4 contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Commercial Industrial for this property. The applicant has applied for a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) for an office-warehouse facility. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Stagecoach Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. Stagecoach Road will require half street improvements and dedication of right-of-way. Since this property is located on an arterial entrances should be limited to minimize any negative effects on traffic or pedestrians on Stagecoach Road. Bicycle Plan: A Class II Bikeway is shown on Stagecoach Road. 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. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is located in an area covered by the Otter Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office And Commercial Development goal states one objective related to this case: “to promote commercial and office development that meets the needs of area residents for shopping and services, maintains as much of the existing topography, trees, and green space as possible, and enhances the primarily residential character of the community.” One action statement: “Strongly discourage construction of large, warehouse type facilities, and large scale and/or high intensity use, within the "heart" of our planning area.” The heart of their planning area is considered to be along Stagecoach Road between Otter Creek and Baseline Roads and this application does not fall in that area. With this large industrial development adequate landscaping should be established, as March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 5 well as minimal changes in the topography to help preserve and strengthen the residential character of the community. Landscape: The width of the proposed on-site street buffer meets the 30-feet requirement. However, if this development is to include the whole site submitted, then the street buffer width will need to be increased to 50-feet. A total of eight percent of the vehicular use areas must be landscaped with interior islands of at least 150 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width. A reduction in the percentage of interior landscaping percentages can be given for loading and unloading areas. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting to rezone the site from R-2, Single-family to PCD to allow office/warehouse to develop on the site in two buildings. Staff noted there were additional items necessary to complete the review and requested the applicant provide additional information concerning proposed signage, fencing, details of the rear service area and proposed dumpster locations. Staff also requested the applicant provide a listing of potential users to ensure the request was in fact an office/warehouse development. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the floodway was a concern. Mr. Dennis stated he had received a certification prior to purchase of the site and the site was not located in a floodway. Staff stated if an individual map revision was received then it was possible that it was not posted on the City’s maps. Mr. Dennis stated he would work with staff to resolve this issue. Staff also stated the applicant would be required to dedicate to the City the floodway or show the area as a floodway easement. Staff stated a twenty-five foot access easement adjacent to the floodway would also be required. Staff also noted the indicated drives did not comply with current City code. Staff stated the ordinance typically would allow for one drive per three hundred feet. Staff stated, based on this criteria, only one drive would be allowed on the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated street buffer did not meet the minimum fifty-foot buffer requirement. Staff also noted if the March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 6 floodway were dedicated to the City, the required street buffer would be reduced to thirty feet. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed site layout and screening along the roadway. It was noted the truck docks along the roadway were typically not attractive. There was a question if the docks could be located in the rear of the buildings. Mr. Dennis stated he did not feel this was a workable option. He stated if the buildings were relocated, the maneuvering room on the site would be limited. Mr. Dennis stated he did not want to fence the area for visibility reasons. Staff suggested a berm could be added to the front to allow screening of the truck docks from the roadway and still allow visibility. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the rear service area will house the trash dumpsters and provide access for deliveries. The applicant has also indicated fencing is not currently proposed. The site plan includes the placement of a single sign near the driveway. The applicant has indicated the sign will be the maximum allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of thirty-six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area. The site plan includes the placement of three buildings on the site in three phases. The building in Phase I contains 29,688 square feet, the building in Phase II contains 39,688 square feet and the building in Phase III containing 2,400 square feet. The site plan includes the placement of 46 parking spaces in Phase I and 62 parking spaces in Phase II. The applicant has indicated Phase I will contain a total of 11,000 square feet of commercial space and 18,688 square feet of office/showroom/warehouse or office/warehouse space. Phase II will contain 15,000 square feet of commercial space and 24,688 square feet of office/showroom/warehouse or office/warehouse space. The typical minimum parking required based on proposed uses and total square footages would be 52 parking spaces in Phase I and 67 parking spaces in Phase II. The applicant has indicated the building proposed in Phase III is warehousing/storage only. Although, the indicated parking is not sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking required for the proposed uses, (6 spaces deficient in Phase I and 5 spaces deficient in Phase II) staff feels the proposed parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 7 The applicant has indicated office, showroom, warehousing with retail sales is being requested to accommodate a wide variety of tenants. The applicant has indicated the site will be marketed to end-users with a need for warehouse and office space from individuals to corporations. The applicant has indicated the primary use of the site will be for storage, warehouse, distribution, manufacturing of goods or those that need more office and operating space with a storage area. The perspective tenants could be (but not limited to) general contractors, construction companies of different trades, material supply companies and those who have products to sell to the public such as an electrical supply business both wholesale and retail, plumbing supply both wholesale and retail or paint and wallpaper store both wholesale and retail. The request also includes tool and equipment rental with no outdoor display. The applicant has provided Public Works staff with the required documentation concerning the floodway. The areas proposed for construction are not located in a regulatory floodway. The applicant has indicated if approved by the lending institution, the floodway will be dedicated to the City. If not approved, a floodway easement will be provided to the City. The applicant has also indicated there will not be any construction of retaining walls within the utility easement. The site plan includes only one driveway entrance to the site. The applicant has indicated a 30-foot street buffer along Stagecoach Road. The applicant has also indicated a berm will be placed in the landscaped area adjacent to Stagecoach Road 30-inches in height to aid in screening of the parking area and service bays. If the applicant is unable to transfer ownership of the adjacent floodway to the City, the required street buffer would be 50-feet. Staff does not feel without the transfer the reduced street buffer will negatively impact the development. Staff is supportive of the reduced street buffer should the applicant’s lending institution not allow the title transfer to the City. The applicant has indicated the recessed truck docks will not be added to the site. Overhead doors on the fronts of the buildings will service the truck bays. The site plan also includes the placement of interior islands consistent with ordinance requirements. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request with the limits placed on the requested uses. The applicant has indicated a maximum of thirty-seven percent of the site will be utilized as commercial uses in Phase I and thirty-seven percent in Phase II. There will be no freestanding commercial uses with the exception of tool and equipment rental with no outdoor display. The commercial square footage will be in conjunction with the office warehouse uses with retail sales. The indicated parking is not adequate to meet the typical minimum parking required based on the indicated uses but staff feels the indicated parking is adequate to meet the typical parking demand for the development as indicated. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786 8 The indicated uses typically do not generate as great of a parking demand as would a straight commercial development. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels if developed as indicated there should be minimal impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions and proposed uses as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and G of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions and proposed uses as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and G of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-7787 NAME: Skyhawk Circle Long-form PD-C LOCATION: Located at 4500 Skyhawk Circle DEVELOPER: Brian Jirel 4500 Skyhawk Circle Little Rock, AR ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 6.78 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Single-family and cabinet shop VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the site located at 4500 Skyhawk Circle to allow an existing 40 foot by 60 foot metal building to be used as a cabinet shop. The applicant has indicated the shop/garage is a beige metal building with four roll-up doors and three walk through doors. The applicant has indicated the building is very compatible with the neighborhood, as several of the residents have the same shop and the same steel manufacturer construct the buildings. The applicant has also indicated their home is located on the site and is approximately one and a half years old. The cover letter states the home is a brick, four bedrooms, and three-car garage home. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7787 2 The applicant indicated the garage/shop was constructed for him to build cabinets for his spouse’s construction contracting business. He states she builds three to five houses per year. The applicant states at the time of cabinet construction, the lumber company delivers cabinet material in a panel truck to the site. He further states when the cabinets are delivered to the job site, a sixteen- foot flat bed trailer is used. The applicant states rarely is UPS or Federal Express used for deliveries. The applicant states the shop is also used as a hobby shop. The applicant’s cover letter states he maintains the roadway and has gravel spread on the road to avoid any potholes, as it is the same road leading to his residence. The hours of operation are from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant states the shop is utilized between ten and fifty percent of the time. He stated it is not uncommon to not be in the shop, but in the field since his business is trim work and remodeling. The property is outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing metal building and a single-family residence. The site is heavily wooded with the exception of the developed area. The driveway is a narrow drive gravel drive extending from an also narrow access easement. The area is developing with single-family homes on large tracts of five plus acres. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Existing access to the site is through a one-lane gravel lane and a one lane wooded bridge, which would not provide standard commercial access. 2. The site is located outside the limits of a detailed flood study. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7787 3 Entergy: A 10-foot under ground utility easement is required or a 30-foot overhead facility easement is required. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional information. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water does not provide water service to this area. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. The drive must maintain a 20-foot width. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Buzzard Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) to make cabinets in an existing outbuilding on the property. The proposal is in a rurally developed area of the Extraterritorial Planning Area and does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan. Staff believes that this particular application does not justify a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Skyhawk Circle is shown as a Local Road on the Master Street Plan and will require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: Unless otherwise provided for, a 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required to help screen the business activity from the adjacent residential zoned properties to the north, east and west. Credit toward fulfilling March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7787 4 this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth, which is able to satisfy this year-around requirement. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six inch caliper and larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to allow the use of an existing metal building as a cabinet shop for the sole purpose of making the applicant’s wife’s cabinets. Staff stated there were few outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff requested the applicant provide details of restroom facilities. Mr. Daters stated there were no restrooms located in the facility. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the access to the site was a narrow one-lane gravel lane with a one lane wood bridge. Staff stated the access would not provide standard commercial access to the site. County Planning noted there were no outstanding issues associated with the request if there was not going to be sale of merchandise from the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening would be required and since the site was heavily wooded this could meet the year around screening requirement. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the building does not contain a restroom facility nor is a restroom facility proposed in the future. The applicant has also indicated there will not be end user sales from the site. The applicant has indicated the site will be utilized to construct custom cabinets for his wife’s business. He has stated his wife is a builder and constructs five new homes per year. He has stated he does not construct cabinets for any other business or person; only cabinets for his wife’s new construction. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7787 5 Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant is proposing a commercial business in a predominately residential area. The area is shown as Single Family on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as is the area around the site. There are several non-conforming uses located in the area all of which were located in the area prior to the City’s exercising Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The area contains a scattering of metal buildings most of which are used as storage or for hobbies. Staff feels the introduction of a commercial business into the area would potentially negatively impact the current development pattern in the area. The area is seeing new subdivisions “popping up” and homes being constructed on five plus acres. Staff is also concerned with access to the site. The access is limited to a narrow one-lane bridge, which does not lend its self to deliveries of materials or transporting the finished product from the site. Staff feels the use is not appropriate for the site and the introduction of a new commercial business to the area is not desirable. Staff feels the site should be maintained as a residential lot without the commercial aspect of the proposal. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated March 2, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the April 14, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the time frame for the deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant’s requested deferral. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to waive the By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-7789 NAME: Serenity Park Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 2801 West Roosevelt Road DEVELOPER: Serenity House Inc. 2801 West Roosevelt Road Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Canino Peckham and Associates 10401 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72205 AREA: 4.581 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District ALLOWED USES: General office uses PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: Alcohol abuse recovery center VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A deferral of the required street improvements to Roosevelt Road and Woodrow Street. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Serenity Park is a well-established alcohol abuse recovery center located on five acres at the intersection of Roosevelt Road and Woodrow Street. The applicant has stated at present, Serenity Park only has facilities to offer its 30-day treatment program to fourteen men. The applicant’s cover letter states they acknowledge the lack of treatment programs for women and a lack of “post recovery” support. The applicant states Serenity Park is in the planning stages of an expansion of their current facilities that would accommodate both together on one “campus”. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7789 2 The applicant has indicated three new buildings will be added to the site. One will house a women’s recovery facility and two post recovery living facilities are proposed in two future phases. The women’s recovery center will house twenty clients for a 30-day treatment program according to the applicant. The majority of each of the client’s day is filled with classes and individual counseling. The applicant has indicated each client is there by their own decision and only has one chance to successfully complete the recovery program. According to the applicant Serenity Park does not allow repeat clients. The applicant’s cover letter states Serenity Park does not allow cars and there is limited visitor-ship. The applicant has stated the post recovery facilities combine group living arrangements for ten clients in a support based structure that guides the individual back into mainstream life. Each client is required to pay a nominal rent and be employed. The applicant states this is a continuation of the initial thirty- day treatment for certain clients for whom it is deemed necessary. The applicant states once again the clients do not have access to their vehicles. The applicant is requesting a deferral of the required street improvements to Roosevelt Road and Woodrow Street. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located on the southeast corner of Roosevelt Road and Woodrow Street. There is an existing building located on the site functioning as a rehabilitation center. To the west of the site is the Pulaski County Jail complex and to the south of the site is an industrial building once used as a manufacturing facility. North of the site is the Oak lawn Cemetery. To the northwest of the site are a variety of commercial uses and further northwest is a single-family neighborhood. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site, the Southend, the Goodwill and the Wright Avenue Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. The proposed land use would classify Woodrow Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Woodrow Street and Roosevelt Road. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7789 3 3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan, on both Woodrow Street and Roosevelt Road. 4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 5. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 7. Provide design of Roosevelt Road conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, provide information concerning number of beds, different uses, etc. to Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414. Entergy: A 10-foot under ground utility easement is required or a 30-foot overhead facility easement is required. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional information. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: 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 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. 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). If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7789 4 CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #14 - the Rosedale Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Industrial for this property. The applicant has applied for a change from O-3 (General Office District) to POD (Planned Office District) to add three additional buildings to the site. Currently the use on the land is of public- quasi-public nature and this application will expand this use. Typically this type of use does not require an amendment to the plan. In the event that an overall review is done for the area, large Public Institutional uses may be reflected at that time. In this case this application does not require an amendment to the plan. Master Street Plan: Roosevelt Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan. Roosevelt Road also has special design guidelines from Asher Avenue to the Interstate 30 Interchange that state it has a reduced right of way of 70 feet with a four lane section and a five lane section with an 80 foot right of way at major intersections. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Roosevelt Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Woodrow Street is shown as a Local Road on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Stevens Neighborhood Action Plan. The Economic Development Goal of “Providing jobs within walking distance to work” could be strengthened by this business since additional employees may be needed at the expanded facility. The Infrastructure Goal states several objectives relative to this case: “1) Construct new sidewalks, 2) Repair existing sidewalks, 3) Resurface streets, and 4) Widen streets.” Additional improvements to the adjacent road and intersection could also strengthen the area’s infrastructure. Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet and exceed ordinance requirements. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7789 5 Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposal included the addition of three buildings on the site. Staff stated Serenity Park currently provided alcohol rehabilitation and was expanding services to include treatment of women and an extended treatment program. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the proposed site plan related to signage, fencing, building height and setbacks. Staff questioned if the development would be phased. The applicant stated the intent was to phase the construction as funding became available. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated boundary street improvements were required. Staff stated the boundary street improvements included improvements to Woodrow Street. Staff stated Roosevelt would require the addition of five feet of pavement. Staff stated this would allow for eleven-foot lanes, which were currently eight and one-half feet. Staff stated a grading permit would be required prior to development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed development appeared to meet the minimum ordinance requirement with regard to buffers and indicated landscaped area. Staff stated an irrigation system to water landscaped areas would be required and landscape plans stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect would be required prior to a building permit being issued. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated set back dimensions from property lines and no new fencing will be added to the site. The applicant has also included details of the proposed signage. The site plan includes the placement of a single sign adjacent to Roosevelt Road located near the entrance to the site. The applicant is proposing a maximum height of three feet and a maximum sign area of forty-two feet. The March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7789 6 site is currently zoned O-3, General Office District which would allow for a sign six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The indicated signage is well within signage typically allowed in office zones. The applicant has also indicated a maximum building height of 30-feet and the total square footage proposed for construction is 28,100 square feet. The site plan includes the placement of three additional buildings in three phases. The applicant has indicated a new building totaling 8,500 square feet will be constructed to house a women’s recovery center in the first phase. The applicant has indicated twenty beds will be added in this phase. The existing facility has fourteen beds. The second and third phases will add an additional twenty beds, ten in each phase as a post recovery facility. The site plan includes 32 existing parking spaces and 16 parking spaces are proposed with the new construction of Phase I. The applicant has indicated additional parking will be added in future phases totaling 16 spaces in Phase II and 4 spaces in Phase III. Based on the proposed use, the typical minimum parking required for the existing site in Phase I would be 17 parking spaces. The typical total parking required when Phases II and III are completed would be 27 paring spaces. Based on the typical parking required for the indicated use, the proposed parking is more than adequate. The applicant is requesting a five-year deferral of the required street improvements to Roosevelt Road and Woodrow Street. The applicant has indicated the cost of street construction would be a significant portion of the budget and would not allow the proposed buildings to be constructed. The applicant is requesting a five-year deferral of the required street construction to allow additional time to raise funds for the roadway construction. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request for a five-year deferral of the required street improvements to Roosevelt Road and Woodrow Street. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7789 7 There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: Z-7790 NAME: Walker Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 820 North Buchanan Street DEVELOPER: Ms. Lori Walker P.O. Box 5456 Pine Bluff, AR 71611 ENGINEER: Donald W. Brooks, Inc. 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.17 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family District ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: Create a plat to separate an existing single-family residential use from an existing parking lot VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance – The creation of a lot without public street frontage. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing a rezoning of this site from R-3, Single-family District to POD to allow the separation of an existing single-family residence and an existing parking lot. The applicant is proposing Lot 17R to continue to function as a residence and Lot 18R will continue to function as a parking lot. The applicant has indicated the parking lot was added to the site several years ago and serves an office building located to the northwest. The approval of the March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7790 2 request will allow the creation of a plat to subdivide the two uses and allow the zoning of the parking lot to conform to the use. The request will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage for proposed Lot 18R. The applicant has indicated an existing alleyway currently serves the lot and this will remain as the access. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a residence with a parking area located in the rear yard. A wall separates the two uses. There is an office building and parking lot located immediately north of the site. An alleyway extending from “H” Street accesses both parking areas. There are office uses located to the west of the site and single-family uses located to the south of the site. To the east of the site is the Terry Library. North of “H” Street is an elementary school. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. No comments on lot split for commercial parking. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7790 3 CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #21 – the University Avenue Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a POD (Planned Office Development) to split a lot into two. The alley lot with the existing parking lot will service the office use located to the northwest. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan since it relates to the Office area shown immediately north of the site. Master Street Plan: Buchanan Street is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. H Street is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan and will not be affected by this application. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. Buchanan Street may require dedication of right-of-way and street and sidewalk improvements. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. None of the Goals or Objectives are directly related to this case. Landscape: Since there are no building expansions or new parking areas to be developed, no landscaping upgrades are required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff stated there were no remaining technical issues associated with the proposed request. Staff noted the proposed request to the committee members present. There was no further discussion of the item and the committee then forwarded the item to the full commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant had addressed all the technical issues related to the proposed development prior to the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant’s request includes a rezoning of this site from R-3, Single-family March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7790 4 District to POD to allow the separation of an existing single-family residence and an existing parking lot. The typical lot area for an R-3, Single-family zoned lot is 5,000 square feet with a minimum width of 50-feet and a minimum depth of 100-feet. The new lot will be 60-feet by 90-feet with a 5,400 square foot lot area. The approval of the request will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of a lot with a reduced lot depth. Staff is supportive of the requested variance for Lot 17R to be used as a residence. The POD zoning request will also allow the parking area (Lot 18R) to come into conformance with the use. Lot 18R is proposed as 60-feet by 50-feet or 3,000 square feet. The parking area serves an office building located to the west currently zoned O-3, General Office District. The typical lot area required for an O-3, General Office District zoned lot is 14,000 square feet. The typical minimum lot width is 100-feet. In addition, the lot will be created as a lot without public street frontage. The proposed lot will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of the proposed lot with a reduced lot width, a reduced lot area and a lot without public street frontage. Staff does not feel the reduced lot width and area will have any adverse impact on the site or adjoining properties. Staff is also supportive of the variance to allow the creation of the lot without public street frontage. An alleyway extending from H Street currently serves the indicated lot. The site has functioned in this manner for a number of years and does not appear to have caused any negative impact. Staff is supportive of the request variance to allow the creation of the lot as proposed. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the rezoning of this site to POD to allow the creation of the two lots and separate the two uses will have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variances to allow the development of the proposed lot with a reduced lot width, reduced lot area and the creation of a lot without public street frontage. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7790 5 variances to allow the development of the proposed lot with a reduced lot width, reduced lot area and the creation of a lot without public street frontage. Ms. Lori Walker addressed the Commission on the merits of her request. She stated the current tenant of the single-family house was requesting to purchase the home. She stated the plat was being requested to allow the division of the two uses. She stated the parking lot currently served an office building facing H Street and the office building desired to maintain control of the parking area. Mr. Tyler Thompson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he lived and worked adjacent to the proposed parking lot and his concern was not so much the lot split but that the parking lot was not being maintained. He stated he periodically cleaned the parking lot of trash. Mr. Thompson stated the business was not utilizing the parking lot. He stated the apartments located to the west of the site were utilizing the parking lot. He stated he wanted to ensure that someone was responsible for the parking lot in terms of cleaning and maintenance in the future and requested the parking lot be tied to the sale of the commercial building it was currently serving. Ms. Walker stated the condition that the parking lot be tied to the sale of the commercial building was acceptable. She stated to meet the required parking demand for the building the parking lot was required. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: 22 FILE NO.: Z-7791 NAME: Colclasure and George Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 18501 Lawson Road DEVELOPER: Sheila Colclasure and Todd Wilson George 18501 Lawson Road Little Rock, AR ENGINEER: Donald W. Brooks, Inc. 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential and a non-conforming cabinet and wood working shop PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Cabinet and wood working shop and the addition of a liquor store VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the rezoning of this site from R-2, Single-family to PCD to allow the addition of liquor sales to the allowable uses for the site. The building was constructed prior to the City exercising Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction and was used as a cabinet shop. The liquor sales was added to the site after the City extended its Planning Boundary. The applicant has indicated the site has a history of commercial activity including a flower shop. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 2 The front of the site is currently paved with a drive extending the entire length of the property. The site plan includes the striping of eleven parking spaces. The existing right-of-way is 25-feet from centerline. The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way to 40-feet from centerline to meet the Master Street Plan requirement. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a metal building currently being used as a liquor store. The liquor store appears to be using a small portion of the building. The building was once used as a cabinet shop but there is no indication the cabinet shop still exists on the site. There is a paved area located adjacent to Lawson Road but there is no striping on the paved area to indicate parking spaces. In addition the driveway extends the entire length of the property. The area contains a combination of uses including residential and non-residential uses. There is a restaurant located to the west of the site and a salvage yard located to the east of the site. The single-family homes located in the general area are both site built and manufactured homes. Immediately east and south of the site are single-family homes. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received several phone calls from area residents in opposition to the proposed request. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Lawson Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. The proposed parking area would be in the Master Street Plan right-of-way. 2. Any future construction of site re-development will be subject to Master Street Plan construction requirements. 3. Driveway width should be limited to 36 feet. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 3 SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Central Arkansas Water records do not show water service to this address. If water service is provided all Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for obtaining service. Approval of the City of Little Rock will be required prior to water service being provided. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: A 40-foot setback is required along all property lines. Plan must meet state minimum standards. Access should be controlled by means of an entrance drive as opposed to access throughout entire width of parking area. Driveway will need County permit and design review. Additional right-of-way should be dedicated in compliance with Pulaski County Master Highway Plan, which list Lawson Road as a Rural Minor Collector (80’ total r/w width). Therefore, the County will require an additional 15-feet dedication under separate description. Indicate owners and use of adjoining parcels. Meet requirements of the City of Little Rock. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Crystal Valley Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows MCI (Mixed Commercial Industrial) for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a liquor store. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Lawson Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and is not constructed to Minor Arterial standards. The purpose of a March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 4 Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. Lawson Road will require dedication of right-of-way and half street improvements. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: The plan submitted does not provide for the average 11-foot wide on-site street buffer required by the Zoning Ordinance. The minimum requirement is 9 feet in width at any given point. Additionally, the plan does not provide for the 9-foot wide street on-site perimeter landscape strip required by the Landscape Ordinance. A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen vegetation, is required west of the business activity area. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005) Mr. Stephen Giles and Ms. Sheila Colclasure were present representing the request. Staff stated the property was located outside the City limits but within the Planning Jurisdiction. Staff stated the site was zoned R-2, Single-family but was a legal non-conforming use for a cabinet shop. Staff stated the applicant had added liquor sales to the site, which was not in compliance with the approved non-conforming status. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide a cover letter outlining the proposed development. Staff also requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation for each business, the number of employees of each business and the total square footage designated for each use. Staff also requested the applicant provide details of any proposed signage. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated drive did not comply with City ordinances. Staff stated the site would be limited to one drive a maximum of 36-feet in width. Staff also stated a dedication of right-of-way 45- feet from centerline would be required. Staff noted this would greatly impact the parking on the site. County Planning stated their required right-of-way would be 40-feet from centerline. City staff stated they would defer to the County’s required right-of-way. County staff also stated they would allow the applicant to utilize the right-of-way for parking until such time as the road was widened. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 5 Landscape comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated site plan did not allow for sufficient landscaping. The applicant stated all the improvements were existing. Staff stated the landscaping comments did not apply to the proposed development since no new construction or paved areas were planned. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided a cover letter indicating the days and hours of operation, the number of employees and the total square footages of each of the businesses. The applicant has also indicated proposed signage on the site plan. The applicant has indicated the liquor sales business will be open from 8:00 am to 12:00 am six days per week. The applicant has also indicated there are four employees of the business. The applicant has indicted the cabinet shop hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm six days per week. The applicant has indicated signage will conform to signage allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of 36-feet in height and 160-square feet in area. The applicant has indicated approximately 2,500 square feet of the site is utilized for the liquor sales and the cabinet shop utilizes 6,550 square feet. The site plan includes the placement of eleven on-site parking spaces. The new right-of-way dedication extends to the edge of the proposed parking. After the dedication of right-of-way, the customers will be backing directly into the right-of-way. The typical minimum parking required for the indicated uses would be 16 parking spaces. The commercial aspect would require eight parking spaces and the cabinet shop/warehouse would require eight parking spaces. The indicated parking is not adequate to meet the minimum paring demand. The applicant has also indicated the driveway cannot be narrowed because when semi-trucks are making deliveries and picking up finished product, they cannot maneuver the site with a narrow drive. Staff has concerns with this proposal. In addition to the free flow of traffic accessing the site and causing safety concerns, staff is also concerned that when semi-trucks are accessing the site they will be blocking parking spaces and possible customers. The site is very tight on parking and the blocking of the parking spaces is not an acceptable option. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 6 Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The design of the site lends itself to activities that do not generate a great deal of traffic to the site such as a cabinet shop or a low volume retail business such as a flower shop. Based on the availability of parking on the site, staff does not feel the proposed use is appropriate. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 3, 2005) Mr. Steve Giles was present representing the applicant. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated their primary concern was ingress and egress from the site and the limited parking available. Staff stated based on the current site layout when delivers were made to the site a large majority of the indicated parking would be blocked. Staff also stated upon dedication of right-of-way the customers would be backing into the right-of- way. Mr. Giles addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He provided the Commission with letters and petitions of support from area residents. He stated the proposed development was located on the western edge of the City’s Planning Jurisdiction. He stated the site was brought in with an R-2 zoning and a non-conforming status. He stated the applicant was requesting to amend his application to remove the request for the placement of a pole sign on the site. He stated all signage would be containing on the building façade. Mr. Giles stated staff’s primary concern was ingress and egress from the site. He stated the applicant was not able to construct a narrow driveway since the construction would take place in the County’s right-of-way. He stated the applicant and the County would have an agreement that the right-of-way would be used by the applicant as parking until such time as the road was widened. He stated when the road was widened more than likely the building would be removed. Mr. David Johnson addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. He stated he had lived in the area for 25 plus years and did not feel the placement of the liquor store on the site would cause any adverse impact on the area. He stated the area was semi rural. He stated the area was safe and he did not feel the addition of liquor sales would create a safety problem in the area. Ms. Jennie Kirkpatrick addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated she had lived in the area for 50 plus years and felt the addition of the commercial business in the area was not appropriate. She stated traffic was a March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 7 concern for area residents. She stated the roadway was a narrow two lane roadway without turn lanes. She stated during the am hours and pm hours there was a large number of automobiles utilizing Lawson Road to avoid the interstate. Mr. James Stauber addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was the first home directly south of the liquor store. He stated his primary concerns were safety, quality of life and the reduction of property values. He stated the roadway was a narrow two lane road with open ditches. He stated the placement of a commercial business in the area would only increase traffic. He stated he was also concerned with sight distance near the location. He stated the roadway was a straight roadway but there were several dips in the road which created the sight distance problems. He stated a residential neighborhood was not an appropriate location for a commercial business. He stated commercial businesses were better suited located nearer intersections. Mr. Stauber stated he felt the placement of the liquor store would affect his property values. He stated perception was in fact reality. Mr. Stauber stated currently the business had a flashing sign and several banners advertising their products. He stated he did not feel this appropriate for a residential area. Mr. Stauber stated the parking lot was dimly lite and he also did not feel this was appropriate for a commercial business. He questioned how the liquor store was approved by the ABC Board without the proper zoning. Ms. Charloette Gilliam addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the neighborhood opposed the liquor store location when the request was filed with the ABC Board. She stated the neighborhood obtained 460 signatures in opposition of the liquor store and they were dismissed by the Board because they were lead to believe the signatures were obtained by a competitor. She stated this was not the case. She stated the neighborhood went door to door to obtain the signatures. She stated she was also concerned with the safety of the residents of Lawson Road and the customers of the business. She stated Lawson Road was a narrow winding road with limited sight distance. She stated there was a store in the area which sold both wine and beer. She stated the parking lot was not large enough to effectively handle the customer traffic. She stated deliveries to the site limited the number of parking spaces available to patrons. Ms. Gilliam stated the owners made the investment knowing the site was not zoned appropriately for the use. She requested the Commission not approve the request based solely on the investment already made by the owners. Mr. Giles stated the applicant would remove the flashing sign and was not requesting any ground mounted signage as a part of the development. He stated the signage would be placed on the building and lite with back lighting. He stated there was a great deal of traffic on Lawson Road in the area but the back-ups were caused by a daycare center located nearby and school bus traffic loading and unloading children. March 3, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791 8 There was a general discussion concerning the proposed site plan and the indicated parking. A question was raised as to if the rear of the site could be utilized as parking. Mr. Giles stated access to the rear of the site was limited due to setbacks. He stated deliveries of the liquor store could be taken from the east side of the building near existing loading docks and deliveries and pick-ups of materials from the cabinet shop could be taken from the west side of the property. Mr. Giles stated the applicant was also willing to limit the site to no semi-truck traffic. He stated the cabinet shop no longer utilized semi-trucks for pick-up and deliveries. Chairman Rahman stated he was concerned with the free flow of traffic on the site. He stated he felt the approval of the site with an intense commercial business was a recipe for safety problems. He stated the site did not have enough room for maneuvering. Commissioner Rector stated the site was shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Mixed Commercial Industrial. He stated the site was going to develop with a high volume business. Commissioner Rahman stated the business being requested was a stop and go business. He stated the site was more conducive to business that did not have so much in and out traffic. There was a general discussion concerning the current driveway configuration. It was stated this was the nature of rural development. A motion was made to approve the applicant’s request as amended to include no ground mounted signage, no parallel deliveries and no semi-truck deliveries subject to compliance with all staff recommendations and comments with the exception of the allowance of a 40-foot right-of-way dedication in lieu of a 45-foot right-of-way dedication. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent.