HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_05 01 2003sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
MAY 1, 2003
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being ten (10) in number.
II. Members Present: Obray Nunnley, Jr.
Judith Faust
Gary Langlais
Robert Stebbins
Norm Floyd
Mizan Rahman
Bill Rector
Rohn Muse
Fred Allen, Jr.
Jerry Meyer
Members Absent: Bob Lowry
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the March 20, 2003 Meeting
of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were
approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
MAY 1, 2003
4:00 P.M.
I. DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Henry Short-form PCD (Z-6467-A), located at 5301 Mabelvale Pike.
B. Land Alteration Ordinance Variance for Forest Management, located at Kiwanis Park
and Morehart Park.
C. Stagecoach Commons Short-form PCD (Z-6813-A), located on Stagecoach Road ½
mile south of Baseline Road.
D. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-01-02 located in the River Mountain Planning
District, located north of Taylor Loop Road near Gooch Lane, a change from Single
Family to Low Density Residential.
D.1 Green Acres Short-form PD-R (Z-7365), located north of Taylor Loop Road east
of Gooch Lane.
II. NEW ITEMS:
1. Foxcroft Fifth Addition Replat of Lot 264 into Lot 264A and 264B (S-166-G),
located at 3410 Foxcroft Road.
2. The Ranch Tract G Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-285-ZZ), located on the
west side of Chenonceau Boulevard just north of Cantrell Road.
3. The Villages of Wellington Phase III Preliminary Plat (S-1042-V), located on
Parliament Court just south of Lamplight Way.
4. Little Northfork Preliminary Plat (S-1358-A), located on Countyline Road just west
of Vimy Ridge Road.
5. Looney’s Tire Service Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1376), located at 7416
Enmar Drive.
6. Greenwood Acres Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-1377), located east of
Stagecoach Road just south of McPherson Road.
Agenda, Page Two
II. NEW ITEMS: (Cont.)
7. Eastern College Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1378), located on the southeast
corner of Forbing Road and Enmar Drive.
8. Gyst Auto Shine Revised Short-form PCD (Z-6639-A), located at 2200 Wright
Avenue.
9. Mike Berg Company Revised Short-form POD (Z-7213-A), located at 17005
Cantrell Road.
10. Highway 10 @ Sam Peck Long-form POD (Z-5059-A), located on the southwest
corner of Cantrell Road and Sam Peck Road.
11. Hospice Home Care Long-form POD (Z-7380), located at 2200 South Bowman
Road.
12. Heifer Project International Long-form POD (Z-7381) and Street Right-of-way
Abandonment for a portion of Industrial Drive and Shall Street; located south of
East 2nd Street between Industrial Drive and John Street.
13. Best Short-form PID (Z-7382), located at 3115 Madison Street.
14. G-25-187 – Asher Avenue Street name change; a proposal to change the name
of that portion of Asher Avenue located west of University Avenue to Colonel
Glenn Road.
15. Zoning Ordinance Amendments regarding Bills of Assurance; Section 36-54(b),
36-83, 36-460, 36-101 and 36-456.
16. Proposed Bylaw Amendment
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-6467-A
NAME: Henry Short-form PCD
LOCATION: 5301 Mabelvale Pike
DEVELOPER:
David Jacks
8209 Stanton Road
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
Jim Bagwell Surveying
122 Gravel Lane
Sherwood, AR 72120
AREA: 0.316 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Non-conforming auto repair garage
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: To recognize the non-conforming auto repair garage and to resolve
an illegal expansion of the building by adding two additional bays in 1999.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant failed to furnish Staff with a revised site plan indicating the new right-of-
way line as requested at the Subdivision Committee Meeting on February 27, 2003.
Staff would request this item be deferred to the May 1, 2003 Public Hearing.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6467-A
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 6, 2003)
The applicant was not present and there were no objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant had requested the item be deferred to the March 20, 2003 Public Hearing.
Staff stated the reason for the request was related to right-of-way issues associated
with the widening of Mabelvale-Pike. Staff stated they were supportive of the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 20, 2003)
The applicant was not present and there were no objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant had requested the item be deferred to the May 1, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff
stated the reason for the request was related to right-of-way issues associated with the
widening of Mabelvale-Pike. Staff stated they were supportive of the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff has not had any contact with the applicant since the February 27, 2003
Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be withdrawn from
consideration since the applicant has failed to furnish Staff with the required information
to complete the site plan review.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff stated they had
not had any contact with the applicant since the February 27, 2003 Subdivision
Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation the item be withdrawn from
consideration since the applicant has failed to furnish Staff with the required information
to complete the site plan review.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chairman placed the item for inclusion
on the Consent Agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
I T E M N O . : B
NAME: Land Alteration Ordinance Variance for Forest Management
LOCATION: Kiwanis and Morehart City Parks
Pine timber in Kiwanis and Morehart Parks is in need of thinning to promote vigorous
growth and reduce risk of pine beetle infestation to protect the remaining trees.
With the aid of the Arkansas Forestry Commission, the park trees were measured and
inventoried. Forest management practices are to maintain timber stocking at a basal
area (square footage in cross-section) of 80. Kiwanis Park is currently at 135 with 170
trees per acre and Morehart has a 102 basal area factor with 109 trees per acre.
Thinning of these parks to the recommended stocking level requires the removal of 418
trees with an average diameter of less than 10 inches in diameter in Kiwanis Park, and
911 trees with an average diameter of 12 inches from Morehart Park.
We would like to schedule the thinning operations for late winter 2003, before the park
usage increases in the Spring.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Parks Department has requested this item be deferred to the March 20, 2003
Planning Commission Public Hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 6, 2003)
The Parks Department was not present representing the application. Staff stated the
Parks Department had requested the item be deferred to the March 20, 2003 Public
Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request for deferral.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
There is no new information concerning this item. The Parks Department will address
the Commission at the Public Hearing with the details of the proposed request.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.)
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 20, 2003)
The Parks Department was not present representing the application. There were no
objectors present. Staff stated the Parks Department had requested the item be
deferred to the May 1, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the
request for deferral.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff recommends this item be withdrawn.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Staff presented a recommendation for the item to be withdrawn without prejudice and to
be considered, by the Commission, at a later date. There was no further discussion of
the item. The Chairman placed the item for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for
withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
NAME: Stagecoach Commons Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on Stagecoach Road ½ mile south of Baseline Road on the
west side
DEVELOPER:
Resource Realty
2016 North Van Buren Street
Little Rock, AR 72207
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 5.0 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office and Mini-warehouse
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance - Lot without public street
frontage.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
2
BACKGROUND:
The site was considered by the Planning Commission, for a rezoning from R-2 to MF-12
and OS (Open Space) at their March 2, 2000 Public Hearing. The property was
proposed to be combined with a 10.2 acre tract zoned MF-12 located south of the site
for a multi-family development. The request was approved by the Planning
Commission and later denied by the Board of Directors.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to create a two (2) lot plat for the development of a
general office building on Lot 1 and the construction of a mini-warehouse
development and boat and R.V. storage on Lot 2. The development on Lot 1 is
proposed as 5,040 square feet of office space to be used by O-2 Zoning District
users. Lot 2 will be served by a private access easement across Lot 1 (creating
a lot without public street frontage) and will be developed as 28,625 square feet
of mini-warehouse. In addition Lot 2 will contain 5,000 square feet of climate
controlled storage and a 2,300 square foot office/manager’s residence and a
boat and R.V. storage area.
The property has an overhead transmission line running east to west within a
100-foot easement. There is also a gas main running parallel to the power line in
a 50-foot easement. The two easements overlap by some 25-feet. The
applicant has indicated the two (2) easements limit the developmental ability of
the property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As indicated the site contains a overhead transmission line running east to west
in a 100-foot easement and a gas main running parallel to the power line in a
50-foot easement. The remainder of the site is wooded.
There is a 10 acre MF-12 zoned site located to the south, recently reviewed and
approved by the Commission, for a multi-family development. A Church sits on
an MF-12 zoned piece of property to the east of the site and a commercial
development (Stagecoach Village) on PCD zoned property is located to the north
of the site. West of the site is a PD-R for Stagecoach Village, a single-family
attached and detached development currently under construction.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
All owners of property within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet of
the site and the Otter Creek Property Owners Association, the Crystal Valley
Neighborhood Association and Southwest United for Progress were notified of
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
3
the Public Hearing. As of this writing Staff has received several informational
phone calls concerning the proposed development.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Stagecoach Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial.
Dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Sec. 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan.
3. The standard conditions shown on the plans as "Public Works Notes" apply to
the project.
4. Re-design driveway to provide an apron and approach perpendicular to
centerline.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is
required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414
for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: There are concerns with the proposed development and
the National Electrical Safety Code Requirements. Contact Lee
Willingham at 490-4749 for additional details.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required to provide water
service to Lot 2. An additional easement outside of the existing electric and
gas easements will be required for this water main extension. The Little
Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site for accessibility and 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. 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 existing water distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional
details.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
4
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: Site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus
radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a mini-storage warehouse.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Otter Creek / Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action Plan.
Action statements under the Office and Commercial Development goal
recommend aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to insure compatibility
between developments, limiting the non-residential development on Stagecoach
Road between Otter Creek and Baseline Roads to uses serving the
neighborhood, and discourage the construction of large warehouse type facilities
on Stagecoach Road between Otter Creek and Baseline Roads.
Landscape: The plan submitted does not allow for the eight percent (839 square
feet) of landscaping required within the interior of the proposed parking area and
associated driveway. Interior landscape islands must be at least 7 ½ feet in
width and 150 square feet in area to count toward fulfilling landscape ordinance
requirements. Additionally, it is recommended that additional grass area(s) be
provided within the loading and unloading area to help decrease the sea of
asphalt proposed.
The proposed land use buffer along the western perimeter has large utility
easements running through it. This will require a variance by the Planning
Commission.
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 northern and
western perimeters adjacent to residential properties. Existing trees are required
to be preserved within 70 percent of the land use buffer areas.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
5
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
Building Codes: No comment received.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 27, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
applicant. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating the
applicant was also requesting the development of a two (2) lot plat. Staff stated
Lot 2 of the plat would require a variance to allow a lot without public street
frontage.
Staff requested Mr. White provide additional information concerning the hours of
operation of the proposed development and questioned if the mini-warehouse
development would be allowed 24-hour access. Staff also requested information
concerning the building heights and if the R.V. storage area would be a covered
storage area.
Staff requested additional information concerning signage. Staff stated the
proposed sign area should be included on the proposed site plan along with the
intentions for signage for Lot 2. Staff requested the proposed site plan indicate
all paved areas and areas designated as landscaped areas.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a dedication of right-of-
way would be required along Stagecoach Road. Staff also stated the applicant
would be required to install a sidewalk along the street frontage. Staff
questioned detention and the proposed location of the detention basin.
Mr. White indicated the area shown as landscaping on Lot 1 could be utilized as
a dry pond. Staff stated drainage in the area was a concern and the applicant
would be required to demonstrate sufficient detention capacity.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the landscaping on Lot 1
was not sufficient to meet the ordinance requirement. Staff stated parking lot
landscaping on Lot 2 would need to be 150 square feet in area. Staff stated prior
to the issuance of a building permit the applicant would be required to submit
plans stamped with the seal of a register landscape architect.
There being no additional items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded
the item to the full Commission for final action.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
6
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to Staff addressing most of the issues
raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
indicated a maximum building height of fifteen (15) feet for the mini-warehouse
buildings and thirty-five (35) feet for the office/managers residence. The
applicant has also indicated the maximum driveway width of 36-feet as requested
by Public Works and realigned the driveway to intersect perpendicular with the
centerline of the roadway.
The revised site plan indicates on-site detention and additional landscaped areas
to break the “sea of asphalt”. The on-site detention is proposed as a “dry pond”
and is located adjacent to the right-of-way along Stagecoach Road on the
northern boundary of Lot 1. The site plan indicates two (2) additional landscaped
areas within the parking area of Lot 2 and indicates a landscaped island around
the power poles and guy wires within the RV and boat parking area.
The applicant proposes the placement of twenty-two (22) vehicle parking spaces
on Lot 1 and six (6) vehicle parking spaces on Lot 2. The typical minimum
parking requirement for a development of this type would be one space per four
hundred square feet for office development and five spaces plus one space per
2000 square feet of gross floor area for warehouse development or twelve
spaces for Lot 1 and 26 spaces for Lot 2. Although there is sufficient parking for
Lot 1 the proposed parking for Lot 2 is not adequate to meet the typical minimum
parking demand by twenty spaces.
The applicant has indicated a single development sign located on Lot 1. The
area has not been delineated but Staff would recommend the signage not
exceed signage allowed in office zones or not to exceed six feet in height and
sixty-four square feet in area.
The applicant has indicated there will be an eight-foot black chain link fence
along the boundaries of Lot 2. The applicant has also indicated slats will be used
for screening along the rear of Lot 2. The use of plastic or metal slats woven into
to chain-link fence is prohibited by the Ordinance [Section 36-516(f)(1)].
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation for the office uses to
be 7:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. The applicant has also indicated
the mini-warehouse will be 24-hour access. Staff is not comfortable with this
arrangement. The applicant has indicated on an-site manager, who would
monitor the activities of the site; there are still concerns of safety and noise
issues related to 24-hour access. The area immediately north of the site is
currently under development as attached single-family subdivision and a multi-
family development located immediately south of the site was recently approved.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
7
In addition, the area is relatively flat and there are numerous homes located west
of the proposed development, which could be impacted by the noise of the
proposed development. When a unit is accessed late in the evening or in the
early morning hours, the slamming of doors could be a disruption to nearby
residents.
The proposed western perimeter is indicated as two hundred seventy-two
(272.87) feet and the required land use buffer along the perimeter includes one
hundred twenty-five (125) feet of utility easements running through it. The
applicant cannot meet the land use buffering requirements of the Ordinance and
is requesting a reduced buffer in this area [Section 36-521(f)]. Staff is not
supportive of this request since the proposed development abuts single-family
zoned property. The northern boundary also requires screening which has not
been indicated on the proposed site plan.
Staff received a comment from Entergy, which stated concerns of the proposed
development under the 115kV transmission line. Energy has stated their
concerns are with the close proximity of people and their property to the
transmission line. Energy has indicated long-term storage of large items such as
boats and rv’s could be subject to induced voltages. Additionally, the gated
security fence causes some concern since the overhead conductors of the
transmission line are always energized and not insulated from contact or near
contact. Prior to approval by Entergy a detailed engineering study addressing
the National Electrical Safety Code and other applicable codes will be required.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed development. Although this is a planned
development request and the typical minimum ordinance requirements do not
wholly apply staff feels the development should meet the spirit of the ordinance.
As indicated above there are numerous issues related to the site, which do not
allow the site to develop in an aesthetically pleasing or unique manner.
The applicant has indicated with the easement constraints, the site would be
most conducive to development with an office/mini-warehouse development.
Staff feels the site could develop as a pure office development. Staff feels it is
important when reviewing a site that is developmentally challenged to review the
site with the same standard for development as all other sites. The applicant has
eighty feet of developable space south of the power line easement and could
place the parking within the easement allowing for sufficient developable land. In
addition, if the area were a quiet office development, the lack of the land use
buffer to the north and west would not be as great an issue as with the placement
of mini-warehouse.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed requested rezoning application as filed.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
8
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 20, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the application. There was one objector
present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the
May 1, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request for
deferral.
Staff stated the deferral would take a waiver of the By-laws. Staff stated the request
was not made in accordance with by the By-laws with regard to the timing of the
request.
A motion was made to waive the By-laws with regard to the request for a deferral. The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. 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 issues raised as a part of the
previous proposal. The applicant has located the RV parking to the south of the buffer
allowing more green space in the area. The applicant has also indicated a six-foot
wooden fence around the development to screen the adjoining properties. The
applicant has increased the buffer to the south allowing for more green space in this
area to buffer the multi-family zoned property not yet developed.
The length of the mini-warehouse building has been reduced to allow for additional
green areas to the west of the site as well. The mini-storage building will be double
loading with access from the north and south of the building. This should have minimal
adverse impact on the surrounding area due to the increased buffer areas.
The applicant will allow the rear of the front building to act as the screening (the eastern
climate control building and the office building) along Stagecoach Road. The building
will be constructed of split-face block with non-reflective roof materials similar in
architecture for the entirety of the buildings. This will act as a wall to further screen the
storage areas from the roadway to passing motorist.
The site is a difficult site to develop. Staff had previously stated the site should be
developed as an office development to limit the negative impacts on the surrounding
area. Staff now questions the viability of an entirely office development in this area.
The site is shown as Mixed on the Future Land Use Plan and a development of this type
is an allowable use under this Land Use classification.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6813-A
9
Staff is supportive of the proposed development as revised. The development has
taken into account buffers and screening for the immediate area and increased the
green areas within the development. The use of the power line easement for long-term
parking of RV’s and Boats is still a concern but the electric utility has outlined
parameters to allow this activity to occur.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed
request. If the development is developed in the manner presented, Staff feels the
development would result in a quality development with minimal negative impacts on
adjacent properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed requested rezoning application as filed to
allow the site to develop as a Planned Commercial Development.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow Lot 2 to develop as a lot
without public street frontage.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.
There were no objectors present. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff presented a
recommendation of approval of the proposed requested rezoning application, as filed, to
allow the site to develop as a Planned Commercial Development subject to compliance
with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lot 2 to develop as a lot without public street frontage.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: LU03-01-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: North of Taylor Loop east of Gooch Lane.
Request: Single Family to Low Density Residential
Source: Joe White, White - Daters & Associates Inc.
The applicant has petitioned to defer this item to the May 1, 2003 Planning Commission
Meeting. Staff recommends placing this item on the consent agenda for deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: March 20, 2003
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the May 1, 2003 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.
Staff Update: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant has petitioned to defer this item to the June 12, 2003 Planning Commission
Meeting. Staff recommends placing this item on the consent agenda for deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 12, 2003 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.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: D.1 FILE NO.: Z-7365
NAME: Green Acres Short-form PD-R
LOCATION: Located north of Taylor Loop Road east of Gooch Lane
DEVELOPER:
Shirley Dyer
15080 Taylor Loop Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 4.46 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Townhouse development
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant has requested this item be deferred to the May 1, 2003 Public Hearing.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7365
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 20, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the application and there were no objectors
present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the May 1,
2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request for deferral to the
May 1, 2003 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has requested this item be deferred to the June 12, 2003 Public Hearing.
Staff is supportive of the requested deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.
There were no objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be
deferred to the June 12, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the
requested deferral.
The Chairman placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The
motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-166-G
NAME: Foxcroft Fifth Addition Replat of Lot 264 into Lot 264A and 264B
LOCATION: 3410 Foxcroft Road
DEVELOPER:
Cathy Mulhollan
3410 Foxcroft Road
Little Rock, AR 72227
ENGINEER:
Marlar Engineer Company
5318 John F. Kennedy Boulevard
North Little Rock, AR 72116
AREA: 4.51 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 3 – West Little Rock
CENSUS TRACT: 22.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Lots without Public Street Frontage.
A. PROPOSAL:
This lot of the Foxcroft Fifth Addition was final platted in October of 1973. The lot
was final platted as a pipe-stem lot with a single access point extending from
Foxcroft Road. The applicant proposes to replat this 4.51 acre lot into two (2)
single-family lots. The lots will be served by a private drive extending from
Foxcroft Road. Lot 264A (the lot containing an existing single-family home) will
contain approximately 2.54 acres and the second lot (Lot 264B) will contain
approximately 1.92 acres and a new single-family home.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-166-G
2
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the creation of a lot without public
street frontage. The original lot was approved with this variance when the
original subdivision was platted in 1973.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family house located near the eastern
property line. The private driveway leading to the site appears to be sufficient for
two cars to pass. There are brick columns located at the end of the drive (the
applicant’s property line) with an approximate 10-foot opening. Two other single-
family homes take access to their property from this private drive.
The area is predominately single-family homes on large lots with the area being
considered for replatting a wooded lot with a single home. The existing drive
currently is a circle driveway with a very steep grade and narrows upon entering
the applicant’s property to approximately ten feet.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, Staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Overlook Property Owners Association along with all owners of property abutting
the proposed plat were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. No public maintenance will be provided for the access easement. All solid
waste collection services will be provided from Foxcroft Road.
2. Confirm with the Fire Department the driveway width is adequate for
emergency services.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required. Easements
should be designated as access and utility easements. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or
private fire hydrants are required. If additional fire hydrants are required, they will be
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-166-G
3
installed at the Developer’s expense. The proposed development will have minimal
impact on existing water distribution systems. Proposed water facilities will be sized
to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water
992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Maintain emergency access. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Representatives were present representing the applicant. Staff introduced the
item indicating the request was to split a lot previously platted in the Foxcroft Fifth
Addition. Staff stated the current lot was served by a pipe-stem extending from
Foxcroft Road. Staff stated there were additional items needed to be shown on
the plat per the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff stated the proposed plat would
require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of an
additional lot without public street frontage. The applicant indicated the lot was
final platted in October of 1973.
Staff requested the applicant correct the “Certificate of Surveying Accuracy” to
read as stated in the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff also requested the zoning
classification within the proposed plat boundary as well as abutting classifications
be shown on the proposed plat. Staff stated the proposed source of water and
wastewater disposal be indicated on the proposed plat. Staff requested contours
be shown at the appropriate level and to provide a building envelope on the
proposed plat.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated all solid waste collection
would be provided from Foxcroft Road. Staff also stated the Fire Department
needed to be consulted to determine the driveway width necessary for
emergency vehicles to access the site.
Comments from Central Arkansas Water and the Little Rock Wastewater
Department were noted as well as the comment from the Little Rock Fire
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-166-G
4
Department. Staff suggested the applicant contact these agencies and
departments for further clarification.
There were no additional comments for discussion. 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 by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
included contours at the required intervals, corrected the Certificate of Surveying
Accuracy and provided the zoning classification of the area within the plat as well
as the zoning of abutting properties. The applicant has also provided a building
envelope as requested by Staff on the proposed plat.
The applicant has contacted the Fire Department and a fire hydrant will be
required as a part of the development. The applicant has indicated the fire
hydrant will be installed as requested. The applicant has also indicated a 25-foot
access easement will be extended along Lot 264A to serve Lot 264B. According
to the applicant the driveway pavement width will meet the minimum required
width requested by the Fire Department.
There is an existing 10-foot utility easement located across both lots. The
easement is for wastewater to service these two lots as well as lots further to the
east. The applicant has indicated no buildings will be constructed on the
easement.
Staff feels the further division of this single 4+ acre tract into two single-family lots
should have no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The
subdivision of this site would result in two 2+ acre sites which exceed the
average lot sizes in the area.
Staff also feels the development of the lot without public street frontage should
not have any adverse impact on the neighborhood. The current lot is serviced in
a similar manner. The extension of the access easement will not exceed the
recommended length for a minor residential street per the Master Street Plan.
The proposed access easement is 673 feet and the ordinance allows a minor
residential street to be 750-feet in length.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The development of this previously platted lot into two single-
family lots should have no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report, including the
requirement to install a fire hydrant and to meet the Fire Department’s minimum
driveway width requirement.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the development
of the lots without public street frontage.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-166-G
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no objectors present.
Staff stated there were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions
outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report, including the requirement to
install a fire hydrant and to meet the Fire Department’s minimum driveway width
requirement.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of the lots without public street
frontage.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
NAME: The Ranch Tract G Subdivision Site Plan Review – Stonebridge Apartments
Site Plan Review
LOCATION: On the west side of Chenonceau Boulevard just north of Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
Embrey Partners
1100 NE Loop 419 Suite 900
San Antonio, TX 78209
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 15.1 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: MF-18 and R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT: 20 - Pinnacle
CENSUS TRACT: 42.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Deferral of Master Street Plan requirements to
Patrick Country Road as agreed to in Ordinance No. 16,814 dated December 20, 1994.
BACKGROUND:
On November 29, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved a site plan
for the development of a 260-unit apartment complex. The development included
eleven buildings and a clubhouse/office building. The development was never
constructed.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
2
Also approved by the Board of Directors was an Ordinance (Ordinance No. 16,814
dated December 20, 1994) to amend the Master Street Plan and to allow a waiver of the
Subdivision requirements with regard to double frontage lots (S-285-S). The Master
Street Plan amendment included the deferral of the requirement to provide Master
Street Plan improvements on Patrick Country Road. The deferral was approved to
allow the developer to construct the Master Street Plan required widening when one of
the following occurred: 1) any additional development (exclusive of the apartment
development on Tract G) which abuts or takes access to Patrick Country Road at the
southwest corner of the Ranch, Tract G; 2) any development within the Ranch along
Patrick Country Road south of said creek; 3) development of over 50% of the office tract
in The Ranch at the northeast corner of Patrick Country Road and Highway 10; 4)
extension of any street from the Ranch to Patrick Country Road.
January 29, 2001 an application was filed for a 260 unit apartment complex to be
located on this site. The application was withdrawn without prejudice at the March 8,
2001 Planning Commission Public Hearing.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing the construction of 260 apartment units on this 15.1
acre site. The design will incorporate a Country French architectural theme.
Custom features include nine (9) foot ceilings, crown moldings, cast stone
fireplaces, plush carpet, computer desks, oval garden tubs and full size
washer/dryer connections. The site is proposed as a limited access with the
placement of gates along Chenonceau Boulevard.
On-site amenities include a community center, which consists of a Leasing
Center, Resident Center and Resort Style Pool. The Leasing Center includes a
dramatic site display and reception area along with the management business
offices. The Residents Center incorporates an elegant business center and
conference room, in addition to a resident social hall with coffee bar, comfortable
seating and entertainment center.
In addition to a full range of resident services, residents will have their choice of
detached, direct access, or two car garages.
The applicant proposes thirteen, two and three story apartment buildings, one
community center complex, five detached garage buildings containing thirty
spaces, one laundry facility and one mail center. The exterior of the buildings are
proposed as wood frame construction with brick, stucco and hardy board plank
siding. The applicant proposes dimensional composition shingles as the roofing
material.
The units are estimated at the following square footages: 72 units at 680 square
feet, 64 units at 750 square feet, 40 units at 1050 square feet, 48 units at 1150
square feet, 12 units each at 1460 square feet, 1250 square feet and 1350
square feet. The units are proposed as one to four bedroom units.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
3
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site without a road in place. The existing
Chenonceau Boulevard stops just short of the subject site. The Ranch
Development is located east of the site with a school, a variety of office buildings
and commercial uses. A preliminary plat for a new single-family subdivision was
filed for the area adjacent to the site to the northeast in the summer of 2002. The
area to the south of the site adjacent to Cantrell Road and zoned C-3 is currently
vacant.
A church is located across Patrick Country Road at the intersection with Cantrell
Road. Patrick Country Road is a narrow unimproved roadway with a wooden
bridge located near the southwest corner of the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Johnson Ranch, the Maywood Manor and the Aberdeen Court Property
Owners Associations along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of
the proposed site were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, Staff has
not received any comment from area residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Patrick Country Road has been granted a deferral for this project of Boundary
Street improvements for this project. Right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline
has been dedicated by a previous plat.
2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan.
3. 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.
4. A grading permit is accordance with Section 29-186 (c)& (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. Obtain 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 Little Rock Traffic
Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpot) for more information regarding
street light requirements.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
4
7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Section 30-43 and 31-210. The width of the primary
driveway must not exceed 36-feet. The emergency access must be located
as far as practicable from the property line but not less than the entrance
radius (20’).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, capacity contribution analysis required. 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: According to Central Arkansas Water’s records water
service will be available to this property when the proposed 12-inch main is
installed and accepted by Central Arkansas Water. Service is not available at
this time. 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 an engineer, licensed to practice in
the State of Arkansas, will inspect installation. Execution of Customer Owner
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. Please submit two copies of the plans for the private fire
line to Central Arkansas Water for review. Contact Central Arkansas Water at
992-2438 regarding procedures for installation of private fire lines. Approval of
plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little
Rock Fire Department is required. This development will have minor impact on
existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to
provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752
concerning fire hydrant placement.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
5
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: The proposed land use buffer along the northern perimeter falls
short of the forty-two (42) foot average width requirement by 5.3 feet (5,883
square feet). At least seventy (70) percent of this buffer must remain
undisturbed.
In order to receive credit, landscape islands within the interior of the vehicular
use area must be at least 300 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width.
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 northern
perimeter of the site.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible on this tree-covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape
Ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6)
inch caliper or larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
applicant. Staff introduced the item indicating the application was a multiple
building site plan review for a site zoned MF-18 and a 20-foot strip to the north
zoned R-2, Single-family. Staff stated the R-2 zoned portion would not need to
be rezoned but would not be calculated in the density allowed nor would the
applicant be allowed to place any buildings or parking in the R-2 zoned portion.
Staff stated the northern portion of the site (the R-2 zoned portion) contained
0.467 acres and the MF-18 zoned portion of the site contained 14.6536 acres.
Staff stated the overall density of the development was 17.743 units per acre.
Staff stated the proposed density was consistent with MF-18 zoned property.
Staff questioned if the proposed development was to be gated. Mr. Daters stated
the development was gated and adequate turn-around had been provided. Staff
also questioned the emergency access point located to the north of the site.
Staff stated the driveway did not meet the traffic access and management
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
6
requirements of the Ordinance. Mr. Daters stated this gate was to be closed
“most of the time”. Staff requested further clarification of “most of the time”.
Mr. Daters stated he would resolve this with the applicant and respond to staff by
the requested date.
Staff questioned if there would be any playground equipment located on the site.
Mr. Daters stated he was not sure and would contact the applicant and if so
indicate the area on the proposed site plan. Staff also stated if the applicant
would be requesting Certificate of Occupancies as buildings were completed, a
phasing plan was required.
Staff requested the applicant provide the details of any proposed signage
(height/area/location) on the proposed site plan and provide the required
screening of the dumpsters on the site plan. Staff stated any site lighting must
be directional and directed inward away from residentially zoned properties.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant was
previously granted a deferral of boundary street improvements to Patrick Country
Road and Staff would continue to honor this request. Staff requested the
applicant (the Ranch Properties) submit a letter outlining the intentions of
boundary street improvements to avoid any future confusion as to when the road
was to be constructed. Staff also stated the use of Patrick Country Road for
construction of the apartment development was not a good idea since the road
was substandard. Mr. Daters stated the applicant would restore the road upon
the completion of construction of the apartment development.
Staff stated the main driveway should be narrowed to 36-feet. Staff also stated a
grading permit would be required and sidewalks would be required in accordance
with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code. Staff stated the stormwater
detention ordinance would apply to this project. Staff stated the project would
most likely qualify for an in-lieu contribution at the time of a building permit.
Comments from Central Arkansas Water were noted. Staff suggested the
applicant contact the water department for further clarification as to the
requirements stated. Staff also noted the comments from the Little Rock
Wastewater Utility and stated the applicant should contact this agency for
additional information as to their requirements.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the required buffer along
the northern boundary appeared to fall short of the required forty-two foot
average buffer. Staff stated at least seventy percent of the buffer must remain
undisturbed and a six foot high opaque screen would be required along the
northern boundary. Staff also stated the vehicle use area interior landscape
islands must be at least 300 square feet in area and seven and one-half feet in
width to receive credit for fulfilling the landscape ordinance requirements. Staff
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
7
stated the applicant would be allowed a transfer from the front side of the
development (Chenonceau Boulevard) to the rear of the development (Patrick
Country Road).
Staff stated the City Beautiful Commission recommended preserving as many
trees as feasible on the site and extra credit toward fulfilling the Landscape
Ordinance would be give for tree preservation.
There being no further items for discussion the Committee the forwarded the item
to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised by
Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The proposed site plan meets
the minimal requirements for the Subdivision Division Ordinance; multiple
building site plan review.
The applicant has indicated on the site plan the development will not be phased.
With this statement on the site plan from the developer the “Certificate of
Occupancies” will not be issued on single buildings or groups of buildings as they
are completed but will be held until the entire development is completed and all
buildings are ready for occupancy.
The applicant has also indicated gate locations and required turnarounds. The
applicant has indicated the northern gate to be an emergency access gate and
will only be used in emergency cases. The applicant has also shown the
southern driveway at the required 36-feet as requested by Public Works.
The applicant has indicated a pool courtyard area but has not indicated on the
site plan a playground area. Staff would recommend the placement of
playground equipment (swings, slide, tot play equipment) in the landscaped area
around the pool to ensure children have access to play equipment.
The applicant has also included on the site plan the location of a monument sign.
The sign will be located near the southern drive on the south side of the
driveway. The note for the proposed signage states a six foot tall by twelve foot
long sign identifying the complex or the maximum allowed. Typical ordinance
requirements for signage allowed in multi-family zones would allow for a sign six
feet in height and no more than twenty-four square feet in sign area. Staff would
recommend the sign area conform to sign area allowed in multi-family zones per
the zoning ordinance.
The parking proposed more than exceeds the typical minimal required parking for
a development of this size. The applicant is proposing the total number of on-site
parking spaces including garages to be 530 parking spaces. Typically for 260
apartment units, 390 parking spaces would be required.
The applicant is requesting the previously granted deferral of street
improvements to Patrick Country Road be continued. Staff is supportive of this
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-285-ZZ
8
request. Staff has requested from the applicant a letter confirming plans for road
construction. The previous ordinance outlines the road development proposal
very explicitly and staff feels if the road is developed in the specified manner that
should suffice for any future development.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The applicant has met the minimum requirements of the
Ordinance but additional items that may be considered related to areas
designated for playgrounds and parks. Staff feels the applicant should place a
play area for children in the area of the pool courtyard.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the applicant install playground equipment in the
pool/courtyard area of the site.
Staff recommends signage be limited to signage allowed in multi-family zones
per the Zoning Ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
application. There were no objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested
the item be deferred to the June 12, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were
supportive of the requested deferral.
The Chairman placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The
motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1042-V
NAME: The Villages of Wellington Phase III Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: On Parliament Court just south of Lamplight Way
DEVELOPER:
Winrock Development Company
2222 Cottondale Lane, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 6.3 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 23 FT. NEW STREET: 910
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.07
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Reduced platted building line for Lots 13 – 20
Block 5 and Lots 10 – 19 Block 4.
Increased length of a minor residential street (910 linear feet).
BACKGROUND:
A preliminary plat for a subdivision of a 16.6 acre tract, creating 45 single-family lots
along with 1680 feet of new street was proposed to the Commission in November 1994.
The proposal included an area located to the west of the existing proposal, which is
listed as an alternative church site. The acreage matching the current preliminary plat
was a request to develop the area into twenty (20) lots, which averaged eighty by one
hundred fifteen or 9,200 square feet. The lots were to be served by a single cul-de-sac
with the typical three lots at the end of the cul-de-sac.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-V
2
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to revise a previously approved preliminary plat to
subdivide this 6.3 acre tract into 23 single-family lots. The area was previously
approved with 20 single-family lots with an average width of 80-feet.
The lots will be accessed by an extension of Parliament Court with the
construction of 910 linear feet of new street. The applicant proposes to terminate
the street with a “hammer head” rather than the traditional cul-de-sac. The
applicant is requesting a variance to allow an increased length of the minor
residential street (950 linear feet). The applicant proposes the lots to average 70
feet by 120 feet and contain approximately 8,400 square feet.
The applicant proposes the street to be constructed with 26-feet of pavement in a
50-foot right-of-way. The applicant is proposing a reduced platted building line
of 15-feet adjacent to the right-of-way for proposed Lots 13 – 20 of Block 5 and
10 – 19 of Block 4. The remainder of the lots will have a 25-foot platted building
line.
The applicant has indicated all utilities are available to the site. The applicant
has also indicated the stormwater detention requirements were met with the
construction of the existing lake several years ago.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site with rolling topography, dropping towards
the southwest from a high point along the northeast boundary of the site. The
area to the north has been developed as single-family homes by the applicant
with a similar lot size as proposed. The area to the south of the site abuts the
Chenal Park Apartments accessed by Chenal Parkway. There is vacant O-1
zoned property to the west of the proposed development and a church located
along Wellington Village Drive.
Other uses in the area include mini-warehouse, office, and vacant commercially
zoned properties. To the east of the site the St. Charles Subdivision abuts the
site and to the southeast is the Parkway Village Retirement Community.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
All abutting property owners, along with the St. Charles Neighborhood
Association were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, Staff has not
received any comment from the neighborhood.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The length of Parliament Court exceeds the criteria (750’) for classification as
a minor residential street. Therefore, a circular cul-de-sac would be required
as shown on a previous plat, or a variance must be approved.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-V
3
2. A drainage easement should be shown across Lot 20.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for the project. 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: A water main extension will be required in order to
provide service to this property. Each lot served must have frontage on this
water main. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection (s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This
development will have minor impact on existing water distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contac the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3572 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus
radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Doug McNeil of Winrock
Development were present representing the application. Staff introduced the
item indicating the area was previously preliminary platted as a 20-lot subdivision
served by a cul-de-sac. Staff stated the current request was for 23-lots to be
served by a “hammer-head turnaround”. Staff stated the request would involve a
variance to allow the increased length of the “hammer-head turnaround”.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-V
4
Public Works comments were discussed including a request for a drainage
easement to be shown across Lot 20. Staff questioned how the drainage would
be taken care of. Mr. White stated the applicant’s intentions were to pipe the
water in this area around Lot 20 to allow Lot 20 to still be a viable lot.
Staff questioned if the three additional lots were critical. Mr. White stated the
three lots were critical to justify the spending of the funds to place the
infrastructure in the area. Staff stated 750-feet was the maximum length of a
minor residential street. Staff stated the sanitation department did not like to
exceed this length because of safety concerns with the backing of garbage trucks
further lengths. Staff stated since the length was so close to the allowable length
Staff could support the requested variance to allow an increase in the length.
There was a general discussion concerning the platted building line and existing
driveway grades within the previous development. Staff questioned if a 15-foot
building line would allow for less steep drives. Mr. White stated he would check
to see if this would offer flexibility. He questioned if 15-foot was allowable under
the hillside development standard. Staff stated the proposed lots did not meet
the minimum required 10,000 square feet.
Comments from the utilities were noted. Staff suggested the applicant contact
these agencies for additional information regarding their comments. Staff noted
fire hydrants would be required per code as stated by the Little Rock Fire
Department.
There were no additional items for discussion. 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 the issues
raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a 15-
foot platted building line on all lots fronting onto Parliament Court or Lots 13 – 20
of Block 5 and 10 – 19 of Block 4. Staff feels due to the topography of the area
the reduced platted building line will allow for a better development of the homes
in the area with less of a grade for driveways.
The applicant has also indicated an increased length of the minor residential
street. The maximum length allowed per the Master Street Plan is 750-feet. The
applicant has indicated the length of the street to be 910-feet. This request will
have minor impact on the city sanitation department since without the traditional
cul-de-sac the garbage trucks will have to back the entire length of the street to
exit. There is some concern for safety in the backing of trucks that far and the
rounding of a curve in the process. The applicant has indicated a southern curve
radius to allow the truck a space to pull-out of traffic. Since the street only serves
17 lots there should be limited traffic on the street. Staff supports the requested
variance associated with the request to allow an increased length in the minor
residential street.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-V
5
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. If developed in the manner proposed the development should
have minimal to no impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat as filed subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced platted
building line on Lots 13 – 20 of Block 5 and Lots 10 – 19 of Block 4.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow an increased
length of a minor residential street.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.
There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
approval of the proposed preliminary plat, as filed, subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a
reduced platted building line on Lots 13 – 20 of Block 5 and Lots 10 – 19 of Block 4 and
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow an
increased length of a minor residential street.
Ms. Sarah Wacaster spoke in opposition of the proposed plat. She stated her home
was located on Lot 8 just north of the proposed development. She stated the site was
currently wooded and the trees acted as a buffer between the multi-family located south
of the proposed site. She stated when the lots were developed the view of the multi-
family would no longer be shielded and the noise level would increase. She stated with
the development of fewer lots then a larger buffer could be retained, which would assist
in the visual and noise concerns. She also questioned the sale-ability of the lots since
they would abut multi-family to the south.
Ms. Heather Metzler spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She questioned
the statement of the 10,000 square feet minimum lot size. Staff stated this related to
hillside development and if the lots did qualify for hillside development standards the
requested fifteen foot building line would be allowed by-right.
She also questioned the statement of backing of garbage trucks. Staff stated the
statement was incorrect and the trucks would turn-around in the hammer head. Staff
stated the turning around in a hammer head was more difficult than in a traditional cul-
de-sac.
There was a general discussion concerning the buffer to the south. Mr. White stated
the development of homes between the multi-family and the existing homes would act
as a buffer.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-V
6
A motion was made to approve the requested preliminary plat and the requested
variances to include all staff recommendations and comments. The motion carried by a
vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1358-A
NAME: Little Northfork Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: On Countyline Road just west of Vimy Ridge Road
DEVELOPER:
Herman M. Reeves
2290 Steel Bridge Road
Benton, AR 72015
ENGINEER:
Laha Engineers
6602 Baseline Road
Little Rock, AR 72219
AREA: 10.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 35 FT. NEW STREET: 1426
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 41.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 10.0 acre tract into thirty-five single-
family lots. In addition, the applicant proposes the placement of 1426 linear feet
of internal street as part of the development. The applicant is proposing a single
access point from Countyline Road into the proposed development.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1358-A
2
There are two cul-de-sac’s proposed to extend from the single entry point. The
applicant is proposing the average lot size to be 8650 square feet with an
average width of eighty feet and an average depth of one hundred twenty-five
feet.
The applicant is proposing one-half street improvements to Countyline Road per
the Master Street Plan requirement complete with the placement of curb, gutter
and sidewalk along the property frontage.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a wooded site, sloping slightly from north to south. Countyline Road is
a narrow two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage. There are new
single-family subdivisions developing to the south in Saline County; Carrington
Place and South-Fork. On the Pulaski County side there are single-family homes
developed on acreage in a rural setting and single-family subdivisions located
north of the site, accessed by Vimy Ridge Road. At the northwest and northeast
intersections of Vimy Ridge Road and County Line Road there is a Dollar
General Store and a Conoco Quick Stop.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Alexander Road, the Quail Run and the Meyer Lane Neighborhood
Associations and Southwest United for Progress along with all abutting property
owners were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing Staff has not
received any comment from the area residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-
half street improvement to the street including five-foot sidewalk with the
planned development.
2. Plans of all work in the 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).
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.
5. Provide the direction of flow and all storm water drainage areas.
6. Easements are required for all storm water drainage areas.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1358-A
3
7. 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 Philpot) for additional 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 Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for
additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required in order to
provide service to this property. Each lot served must have frontage on these
water mains. This development will have minor impact on existing water
distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water for additional
details at 992-2438.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Troy Laha of Laha Engineers and Mr. Herman Reeves the owner were
present representing the application. Staff introduced the item indicating the site
was previously reviewed by the Commission as a duplex development. Staff
stated the current proposal was for a single-family development and the
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1358-A
4
proposed lot size of the proposed preliminary plat appeared to meet all the
Subdivision Ordinance requirements. Staff stated there were a few items needed
on the proposed preliminary plat to comply fully with the ordinance.
Staff requested the applicant indicate a phasing plan if one was intended.
Mr. Laha stated the development would be developed in one phase. Staff also
requested the applicant indicate the zoning of all abutting properties and the
zoning of the property within the proposed plat.
Staff requested contours be shown at the required intervals on the proposed
preliminary plat. Staff also requested a preliminary storm drainage analysis and
a preliminary storm drainage plan.
Staff requested the applicant correct the Certification of Preliminary Surveying
Accuracy to read as stated in the Subdivision Ordinance.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated one-half street
improvements would be required to Countyline Road. Staff stated sidewalks
would be required along Countyline Road but it appeared all interior streets
would be exempted. Staff stated any street which exceed the 750-foot maximum
would require sidewalks. Mr. Laha stated he would confirm the length of the
interior streets and show any sidewalks, which would be required to meet the
ordinance requirement.
Mr. Laha stated Countyline Road was not located on the actual County line.
Staff stated the one-half street improvements would be measured from the
centerline of the existing roadway.
Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water and the Little Rock
Wastewater Utility Department. Staff also noted fire hydrants would be required
within the development. Staff suggested Mr. Laha contact each of these
departments with any questions or comments.
There were no further items for discussion. 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 by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
indicated contours at the required intervals on the proposed preliminary plat. The
applicant has also corrected the Certificate of Surveying Accuracy to read as the
Subdivision Ordinance requires.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1358-A
5
The proposed plat complies with the minimal requirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance. The applicant is not requesting any waivers or variances as a part of
the plat and has indicated one-half street improvements will be constructed to
Countyline Road.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels if the subdivision is developed in the manner
presented, the development should have minimal to no adverse impact on the
area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested preliminary plat subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Troy Laha of Laha Engineers was present representing the applicant. There were
no objectors present. Staff stated there were no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested
preliminary plat 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 chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1376
NAME: Looney’s Tire Service Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: 7416 Enmar Drive
DEVELOPER:
Looney’s Tire Service
7416 Enmar Drive
Little Rock, AR 72209
ARCHITECT:
Terry Burruss Architects
1202 South Main Street, Suite 230
Little Rock, AR 72202
AREA: 3.67 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: I-2, Light Industrial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs, East
CENSUS TRACT: 20.02
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes a multiple building site plan review for this I-2 zoned
piece of property located at 7416 Enmar Drive. Looney Tire Service proposes to
remove two existing structures and replace them with one new structure
(90’x95’). The new facility will house office space and five auto tire bays.
The applicant has stated all entry drives are existing and all utilities are present
on the site. The applicant has indicated parking will be rearranged to allow for
increased landscaping adjacent to Enmar Drive and building landscaping around
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1376
2
the new structure.
The applicant has indicated there will be sixty-five parking spaces on site and
twenty-five spaces are leased from an adjoining property owner. The applicant
has stated the hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 5:30 pm, Monday through
Friday and Saturday from 7:00 am to noon.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is an existing tire business in an area of wholesale and distribution
businesses. Uses in the area include the Eastern College located on the corner
of Enmar Drive and Forbing Road, a NAPA Auto Parts store and distribution
center, Mid-South Appliance, Comcast, an auto body repair shop, and Little Rock
Rubber Company. A railroad mainline is located to the west of the site. The
area is zoned primarily I-2 with scattered lots of R-2, Single-family zoned
property.
The road has been constructed with curb and gutter and sidewalks.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing Staff has received one informational phone call from an area
property owner. The Wakefield Neighborhood Association and Southwest United
for Progress were notified of the Public Hearing along with all owners of property
located within 200-feet of the proposed development.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The proposed land use would classify Enmar Drive on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30-feet from centerline.
2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. This property would
qualify for a contribution in-lieu of construction.
4. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Section 30-43 and 31-210. The middle driveway should
probably be closed.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1376
3
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 if
larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is located near Bus Routes 17 and 17A but has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: An upgrade in landscaping toward compliance with the Landscape
Ordinance equal to the expansion proposed (20%) will be required.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers and the General
Manager of Looney Tire were present representing the application. Staff
presented the item indicating to the Committee the request was for a multiple
building site plan review. Staff stated the applicant intended to remove two
existing buildings and replace the buildings with a single building. Staff stated
this would leave three buildings on the site. Staff stated the new building would
be for light vehicle tire replacement while one of the remaining buildings would be
servicing heavy duty trucks (18-wheelers). The third building would be for
storage of tires.
Staff stated there were additional items needed on the proposed site plan to
include: drive dimensions, building dimensions from property lines, building
setbacks, existing and proposed fire hydrants and street right-of-way widths.
Mr. McGetrick stated to add these items would not be an issue.
Staff also requested the days and hours of operation and existing or proposed
signage. Staff stated any signage should include details (height/area/location).
Staff also questioned if any of the site would be dedicated to outdoor storage.
Mr. McGetrick stated he would confirm any outdoor storage with the owner. Staff
stated any on-site dumpsters should be shown on the site plan along with the
required screening.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Enmar Drive was
classified as a Commercial Street on the Master Street Plan (60-foot right-of-
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1376
4
way) and a dedication of right-of-way 30-feet from the centerline would be
required. Staff also stated any curb and gutter or sidewalk that was current
lydamaged would be required to be repaired prior to occupancy.
Staff stated the current driveways did not meet the ordinance requirements and
requested the applicant remove the center drive. Mr. McGetrick stated the center
drive was critical to separate light duty vehicles from truck traffic. Mr. McGetrick
stated the southern drive was to enter only and the northern drive was for exit
only. He stated the 18-wheelers would be routed around the building on a one-
way drive. Mr. McGetrick stated the applicant would ensure this arrangement by
controlling traffic with striping and signage. Staff stated since the drive was
existing, the drive could remain.
All other comments were noted. Staff suggested any questions should be
directed to the appropriate agency.
There were no further items for discussion. 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 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated all
building setbacks from property lines and indicated all existing and proposed fire
hydrants on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated the rear
line to be a fence adjacent to the railroad right-of-way.
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be 7:30 am to
5:30 pm Monday through Friday and 7:30 to 12:00 Noon on Saturday. The
applicant has also estimated approximately 20 employees on the site. The
proposed signage is the existing pole mounted sign located near Enmar Drive.
The sign is twenty-four feet in height and two hundred square feet in area. The
sign area exceeds to the zoning ordinance standard for industrially zoned
properties.
The proposed site plan indicated dedication of right-of-way as requested by
Public Works Staff. The dedication will include 30-feet from the centerline of
Enmar Drive. The applicant has also indicated repair of curb, gutter and
sidewalks will be made to any damaged areas prior to occupancy of the new
structure.
Previous Public Works comments requested the applicant remove the center
drive from Enmar Drive. The applicant has indicated this drive location is critical
to traffic flows around the site. The applicant has stated the primary purpose of
the drive is for car and light duty truck traffic allowing them to be separated from
the 18-wheeler traffic, which is also serviced at the site. Staff feels since the
driveway is existing, the applicant should be allowed to keep the drive. If the
development were a new development, the applicant would not be allowed three
drive locations on Enmar Drive.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1376
5
Parking is not a concern of Staff for the development. The applicant has
indicated 65 on-site parking spaces and 25 off-site parking spaces. The typical
minimal parking demand would require 47 parking spaces for a development of
this type. The available parking is more than sufficient to meet the typical
parking demand.
The applicant has identified areas of outdoor storage. The applicant has
indicated along the south property line and the western property line strips will be
used as storage and two smaller areas adjacent to the building will be used as
temporary storage areas.
Otherwise, to Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with
the proposed request. The applicant has met the intent of the multiple building
site plan review process per the Subdivision Ordinance and Staff feels if
developed as presented, the development should have no adverse impact on the
surrounding neighborhood.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the applicant. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated
with the request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request as filed
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 chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-1377
NAME: Greenwood Acres Subdivision Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: East of Stagecoach Road just south of McPherson Road
DEVELOPER:
G & S Builders, Inc.
2723 Foxcroft, Suite 104
Little Rock, AR 72227
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
311 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 48.31 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 193 FT. NEW STREET: 6250
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 12 – 65th Street, West
CENSUS TRACT: 24.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 48+ acre site into 193 single-family lots.
The proposed lots will average 65’x120’ or 7800 square feet in area. The
applicant proposes the development to occur in five (5) phases.
The applicant has indicated the development will be developed in five phases.
Phase I will consist of the development of 47 lots, Phase II 38 lots, Phase III 44
lots, Phase IV 36 lots and the final phase, Phase V, 28 lots. The applicant is
requesting Master Street Plan improvements to Herndon, Lanehart and
McPherson be deferred until the appropriate phase develops.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
2
The proposed development includes two play areas, one to be constructed in
Phase II and the second, a tot lot, to be constructed in Phase V.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a tree covered site adjoining the Pecan Lake Subdivision to the
northeast. The area immediately north of the site, across Herndon, is also a
vacant wooded site. Lanehart Lane has developed with single-family homes and
two non-residential uses located near the intersection of Lanehart and
Honeysuckle. The area across Stagecoach Road is a church and the Baptist
Seminary. Just south of the site, along Stagecoach Road, there are two rather
large automobile salvage yards.
The roads are unimproved roadway with open ditches for drainage and no
sidewalks.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing Staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. All abutting property owners of the site and the Pecan Lake, the
Stagecoach Dodd, the Westwood and Tall Timber Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the Public Hearing. In addition a neighborhood meeting was held
on April 17, 2003 with the developer and the three area Neighborhood
Associations to provide additional information to area residents and property
owners.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Lanehart Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street.
Dedication of right-of-way to 30-feet from centerline will be required. Other
right-of-way widths indicated on the plans are acceptable.
2. Provide the design of Boundary Streets conforming to the Master Street
Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including
5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. This includes Stagecoach,
Lanehart, McPherson and Herndon.
3. Sidewalk locations are acceptable. Appropriate handicap ramps are
required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the
Master Street Plan.
4. Plans for 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 (Derrick Bergfield).
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
3
5. A grading permit is 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. Easements for proposed storm water detention facilities are required.
7. Easements are required for all storm water drainage areas.
8. 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 Philpot) for more information regarding street light
requirements.
9. Provide street profiles of hillside streets that demonstrate compliance with
grade and sight distance design criteria. Re-location of one street and one
cul-de-sac may be required.
10. Lots four through seven are crossed by a drainage way that needs to be
addressed through easements of re-configuration.
11. All street names must be approved by Public Works. Show proposed street
names on the proposed plat.
12. Minimum corner curve radius is 150-feet.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details at
688-1414.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of
connection (s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water
main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. Each
lot served must have frontage on this water main. This development will have
minor impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will
be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Some portion of the
water facilities to be installed in this area maybe larger than required for this
development in order to enhance the overall reliability of the water system.
Central Arkansas Water will participate in a portion of the cost of oversized
facilities. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
4
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present
representing the application. Staff stated the request was for a single-family
preliminary plat to be located near the Pecan Lake Subdivision. Staff stated the
request included 48.31 acres and 197 lots. Staff stated the proposed density
equated to approximately 4-units per acre, within the allowable density of single-
family development.
Staff stated the proposed development abutted Stagecoach Road, McPearson
Road, Lanehart Road and Herndon Road. Staff stated the applicant had
indicated a phasing plan for the development. Staff stated the applicant was
requesting the development of these roadways be deferred to the corresponding
phase of development.
Mr. McGetrick stated he was requesting in-lieu for the sidewalk construction on
Stagecoach Road. He indicted he would contact the Highway Department with
regard to the future development of Stagecoach Road and if the road was to be
constructed in the near future he would then request an in-lieu contribution.
Mr. McGetrick stated with this development (the single-family plat) Stagecoach
Road would be developed with a turn lane but the applicant was requesting to
allow an in-lieu contribution for the sidewalk construction if the Highway
Department was going to come through and tear out the new sidewalk in the
near future.
Staff also requested any proposed parks and playground areas be shown on the
proposed preliminary plat. Staff stated they had previously met with
Mr. McGetrick regarding the plat and he had indicated two possible areas for
park and playground development. Staff also stated Mr. McGetrick was aware of
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
5
an area of concern with regard to terrain development (proposed Lots 10, 11 and
12 and 21, 22 and 23). Mr. McGetrick stated he was looking into these areas for
possible combination of lots to allow for a larger lot area.
Staff requested Mr. McGetrick indicate in the General Notes section the
proposed source of water and wastewater disposal. Staff also requested the
proposed plat include the average lot size and the minimal lot size. Staff stated
the General Notes section should also include the total number of lots proposed
and any applicable covenants and/or proposed covenants on the land. Staff
stated the proposed plat should include street names.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated all boundary streets were
required to be brought up to standard per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated
the proposed radius on the interior streets did not meet the minimum required
radius. Mr. McGetrick stated a waiver of this requirement would be requested.
He stated the intention was to slow traffic and a wider radius would only increase
traffic speeds.
Staff requested all drainage easements be shown on the proposed plat along
with a preliminary storm drainage analysis and preliminary storm drainage plan.
Staff stated all stormwater detention facilities would require easements as well as
all stormwater drainage areas.
Staff noted comments from the Central Arkansas Water Utility Company and
from the Little Rock Wastewater Utility Department. Staff suggested
Mr. McGetrick contact these agencies for further clarification of their comments.
Staff also noted fire hydrants would be required within the proposed
development. Staff suggested Mr. McGetrick contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for further information regarding this requirement.
There were no additional items for discussion. 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 concerns
raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
reduced the number of lots to 193 lots. The reduction allowed for two play areas;
one to be constructed in Phase II and the second, a tot lot, to be constructed in
Phase V. The applicant has also addressed Staff’s concerns of topography in
the area of Lots 24 – 30 by reducing the number of lots and increasing the lot
area.
The applicant has indicated the development will be developed in five phases.
Phase I will consist of the development of 47 lots, Phase II 38 lots, Phase III 44
lots, Phase IV 36 lots and the final phase, Phase V, 28 lots. The applicant is
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
6
requesting Master Street Plan improvements to Herndon, Lanehart and
McPherson be deferred until the appropriate phase develops. Staff is supportive
of this request. Typically, street improvements are phased and installed as the
phase is being developed.
The applicant proposes to realign Herndon Road as a part of the development.
The applicant will construct the entire roadway of the newly aligned Herndon
Road with the initial phase as well as construct improvements to Stagecoach
Road adjoining the property. The applicant has indicated coordination with the
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department will be sought to ensure the
improvements match the Phase II Plans of the Highway Department for
Stagecoach Road.
The applicant has contact the Little Rock Wastewater Department and the
Wastewater Department has assured the applicant the sewer lines in the area do
have adequate capacity to serve this development. A letter from the Wastewater
Department has been requested and is forthcoming. Central Arkansas Water
has indicated the water system has adequate capacity to serve this area also.
The site is shown as Single Family on the City’s Future Land Use Plan (up to five
units per area). Area residents have expressed the density of the development
as a concern. The overall density of the proposed development is 3.99 units per
acre, within the allowable density of single-family development.
The applicant has met the minimal requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance
(60 by 100 foot lots or 7,000 square feet in area). The applicant has also set
aside areas for play areas for the development. The applicant has indicated
sidewalks will be placed as required per the Master Street Plan and all
infrastructure will be put in place as the subdivision is developed.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels that although the development is proposed at a
density greater than existing developments in the area the development, the
development does meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested preliminary plat subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends approval of the requested phasing plan for street
development.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow an increased
radius on the two interior streets.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow an in-lieu contribution for
sidewalk construction along Stagecoach Road.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick was present representing the
application. There were objectors present. Staff stated the proposed preliminary plat
did met all the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff presented a
recommendation of approval of the request.
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, stated according to Richardson v. the City of
Little Rock Planning Commission if a proposed preliminary plat meet all the minimum
requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance with regard to lot sizes the Commission
must approve the request.
Mr. Steve Thompson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed
development. He stated the residents of Pecan Lake were opposed to the proposed
development. He stated his concerns were with the traffic, the density and the ability of
the area schools to handle the children. He stated the area was a quiet place and the
development of this number of homes in this small of an area was too intense.
Mr. A.G. Krippendore addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed
preliminary plat. He stated his concern was drainage. He stated the site was a former
dairy farm and the area was very low. He stated the existing culverts under the roads
were not adequate to handle the existing water when there was a small rain and with
the additional paving in the area there would be additional drainage problems.
Mr. Charles Tanner addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed
preliminary plat. He stated the neighborhood was concerned with the roads in the area.
He stated currently the area did not have a problem with crime since all the roads lead
to a dead end. He stated if the development was constructed then this would open up
roads into the neighborhood and thus lead to additional crime concerns.
Mr. Tanner stated the current roads were narrow and not designed to handle the current
traffic. He stated with the development of the site with 192 homes this would only
increase traffic in the area and thus further tax the existing roads. He stated the traffic
on Stagecoach was significant in the morning and afternoon. He stated with the
addition of these homes this would further increase the traffic in the area.
Mr. Tanner stated the three neighborhoods had joined together and gathered 400 plus
signatures in opposition of the proposed density.
Ms. Janet Berry spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated there
were three suggestions from the neighborhood with regard to the development. She
stated the lots that were not internal to the neighborhood would not feel a part of the
neighborhood.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
8
Ms. Berry stated the development of a play area in the detention pond area was not the
proper place to place a playground. She stated with the current drainage problems in
the area the children would not be allowed to play in the park for a majority of the year.
She stated the proposed development should incorporate additional green space to
make the development more conducive to the neighborhood.
Ms. Mary Rogers spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the
residents of Pecan Lake were not opposed to development they only wanted the
development to be compatible to the neighborhood. She stated her concern was for
the children. She stated the proposed development did not allow for sufficient play area
for the children of the neighborhood. Ms. Rogers stated the residents of Pecan Lake
would like to see fewer lots, approximately 120 lots with adequate green space.
Ms. B.J. Wyrick addressed the Commission stating she was a member of the Board of
Directors and represented Ward 7, the area of the proposed plat. She stated she had
attended a neighborhood meeting with the developer and the three affected
neighborhoods and had asked for a show of hands in support of the development and
no one in attendance was supportive of the development.
Director Wyrick requested the developer install the detention in the first phase to help
eliminate concerns of drainage. She stated the roads in the area were substandard and
requested all the Master Street Plan roadways be constructed in the first phase as well
to assist in the travel of automobiles through the area. She also requested a turn lane
be installed on Stagecoach Road to assist residents of the new subdivision with
entering the site during peak traffic hours. Director Wyrick also requested a fence be
installed to separate the existing single-family homes on large lots from the new homes
which would be constructed on somewhat smaller lots.
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission with observations. She stated the proposed
development would increase traffic on already taxed roadways and the infrastructure in
the area was not adequate to handle the increased number of homes. She stated until
the city began requiring off-site improvements this would continue and the current
situation would only worsen.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the
infrastructure in the area. Staff stated the wastewater department had indicated there
was sewer capacity in the area and the water department had also indicated the
proposed development would not significantly impact water distribution.
The roadways were discussed. Staff stated the roads were narrow roads with only
sixteen foot of pavement and open ditches for drainage. The Commission questioned
the finished road width after ½ street improvements were in place. Staff stated there
would be approximately 20 to 22 feet of pavement, curb and gutter on the applicant’s
side and a 2 foot shoulder on the opposite side of the road.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1377
9
There was discussion concerning the exterior lots backing onto the road. Staff stated
the roads were classified as local streets and this was permissible. Staff stated the
traffic at build-out would generate additional traffic in the area to close to collector
standards but backing out onto the road would still be permissible.
Temporary detention was discussed. Staff stated the applicant would be required to
place temporary detention on site during Phase I to ensure there was no additional run
off. Staff stated the applicant would also be required to fix the culvert in the area and
ensure down stream capacities were in place to handle the additional water. Staff
stated they would not be able to correct problems on private property.
Mr. McGetrick stated the developers did not want to fence the proposed subdivision.
He stated they wanted to feel a part of the neighborhood. He stated the development
was a single-family neighborhood much like the neighborhoods in the area.
The Commission questioned at what point Bills of Assurance were reviewed. Staff
stated the applicant submitted a preliminary Bill of Assurance at the time of filing. Staff
stated the Bills submitted did not govern the items the neighborhood was concern with
such as square footage, construction materials, etc. Staff stated the Bill of Assurance
submitted only ensure the minimum requirements were being adhered to per the zoning
and subdivision ordinances.
Mr. McGetrick stated the developer intended to construct homes in the $110,000 to
$150,000 price range. He stated the developers had constructed homes in the Pecan
Lake and Tall Timber neighborhoods and was very familiar and sensitive to the desire of
the neighborhoods.
A motion was made to approve the proposed preliminary plat as filed to include all staff
recommendations and comments. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 noe,
1 absent and 1 abstention (Obray Nunnley).
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-1378
NAME: Eastern College Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: On the southeast corner of Forbing Road and Enmar Drive
DEVELOPER:
Eastern College of Health Vocations
6423 Forbing Road
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
W. William Graham, Jr., Inc.
100 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 2-B
Little Rock, AR 72205
AREA: 4.29 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: I-2, Light Industrial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 –Geyer Springs, West
CENSUS TRACT: 20.02
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the placement two, twenty-four foot by sixty foot
permanent modular classroom, in accordance with all city codes, behind the
existing building located at 6423 Forbing Road. The applicant has indicated due
to an increase in enrollment and the additional program offerings, Eastern
College of Health Vocations needs additional classroom space to accommodate
the increase in student population.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1378
2
There are currently three buildings located on the site; one a modular classroom
and two permeate structures. The request is to remove the single modular
classrooms and to affix permanently two modular classrooms.
There is on-site parking (13-spaces) as well as parking leased from the NAPA
Auto Parts store located to the south of the site (90-spaces).
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is being used by Eastern College with the majority of the parking being
located off site in a parking lot to the south of the site. Currently there are
students and/or facility parking on the grass areas in front of the school on both
sides of the driveway. The NAPA Auto Parts store and distribution center is
located across Enmar Drive and it appears students are using a portion of this
parking as well.
The area to the north of the site is being used by large non-residential users such
as West Tree Service and Wagner. The areas to the south are also large
warehousing and distribution facilities such as Mid-South Appliance, Little Rock
Rubber, Looney Tire and an automobile collision repair shop.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Wakefield Neighborhood Association and Southwest United for Progress
were notified of the Public Hearing along with all owners of property located
within 200-feet of the proposed development. As of this writing Staff has not
received any comment from area residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The proposed land use would classify Enmar Street on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30-feet from the Centerline.
2. Forbing 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.
3. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
Enmar Drive with Forbing Road.
4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Appropriate handicap ramps are
required in the public right-of-way.
5. Remove the private dumpster from the public right-of-way.
6. 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.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1378
3
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 if larger
and/or additional water meter(s) are required. The Little Rock Fire Department
needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public fire hydrant(s) will
be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the
Developer’s expense.
Fire Department: No comment received.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is located on Bus Routes 17 and 17A but has no effect on bus
radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: Areas set aside for landscaping and buffers meet with ordinance
requirements.
An upgrade in landscaping toward compliance with the Landscape Ordinance
equal to the expansion proposed (28%) will be required.
If new areas are to be paved to help with the parking situation, then provisions
will need to be made for meeting zoning buffer and landscape ordinance
requirements. Meeting ordinance requirements in this regard should not pose a
hardship.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated they had been in contact with the
applicant regarding their comments. Staff stated the applicant had previously
been granted a request to install one temporary portable building by staff. Staff
stated the request was to remove the temporary potable buildings and replace
them with two permanent building. Staff stated the request was for a multiple
building site plan review (resulting in four buildings on the site).
Staff stated the school was leasing parking from an adjoining property owner
and, although with the removal of the temporary building seven additional parking
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1378
4
spaces would be gained the site appeared to still have a parking problem. Staff
stated with the existing parking and the additional parking to be gained the
parking did meet the minimum required parking per the Zoning Ordinance. Staff
stated when the site visit was made there were cars parking on the grass areas
on both sides for the drive extending from Forbing Road. The Committee
members stated this was an enforcement issue. Staff stated this was correct and
they were working with the applicant to resolve this issue.
There being no further items for discussion. 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 issues and
concerns raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has
moved the dumpster from the public right-of-way and indicated the location in the
area south of the site in the leased parking area. Staff feels this location with
proper screening is a suitable location.
The applicant has also increased the on-site parking spaces and labeled the
available spaces on the rear lot. There are 90 spaces leased and 13 on-site
parking spaces. This is a total of 103 parking spaces. Typically for school
minimal parking is required at one space per 300 gross floor area or one space
per four students which ever is greater. The site contains 9767 square feet of
building area and would require 32 parking spaces. There are 275 students
enrolled at the campus, which would require 68 parking spaces.
Although, the available parking should be sufficient to meet the typical minimal
parking requirement per the ordinance, when Staff made a site visit there were
cars parking on the grass areas on both sides of the driveway extending from
Forbing Road and the parking area to the rear was near capacity. This is an
enforcement issue and the applicant has been given a notice. Staff feels the
parking should be dealt with now to avoid the applicant being required to file with
the Commission at a later date for parking relief. Staff feels the applicant should
install parking along the driveway to increase the available parking on the site to
eliminate the violation of students and teachers parking on the grass areas.
All other requirements have been met for the multiple building site plan review
and there are no other issues associated with the request. Staff does feel the
parking issue is a major issue and would recommend denial of the proposed
application until the applicant can resolve the parking concerns.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed request as filed due to the parking
concern.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1378
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated their initial concern had been addressed by the placement of no
parking signs on each side of the driveway. Staff stated the administration and students
were no longer parking on the grass covered areas. Staff stated if parking became an
issue in the future the parking situation would be handled through an enforcement
action.
Staff stated to their knowledge there were no other outstanding issues associated with
the proposed request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the proposed
requested multiple building site plan review 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 chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
NAME: Gyst Auto Shine Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: 2200 Wright Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Vincent Liddell
8101 Frenchman Lane
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
311 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 0.49 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Automated carwash and detailing shop.
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Hand use auto carwash and detailing shop.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
Gyst House currently operates a car wash/detail shop at the northwest corner of Wright
Avenue and Park Street. The property was rezoned from C-3 to PCD by Ordinance No.
18,077 on August 3, 1999. The car wash had a nonconforming use status prior to the
PCD rezoning.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
2
The original PCD request was to redevelop the site by removing the existing building
and constructing a new 4450 square foot automated car wash building, expanding onto
the R-3 zoned lot immediately north of the existing car wash site. The applicant
proposed to access the site by utilizing a divided driveway from Park Street. There
were nine parking spaces proposed. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to
be from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant noted that all
work would be done within the enclosed buildings.
Access to the site was to be from Wright Avenue through a single entrance. The
applicant also proposed there was not to be any servicing of vehicles on the street (on-
site only). Along the north property line there was to be a six foot wood fence and a six
foot landscape buffer. The dumpster was to be serviced during daylight hours only.
The applicant was to have a single ground-mounted, monument type sign and
approximately 8 feet by 10 feet in area.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to retain the present use of the site, which is a carwash
and cleaning service for the general public. The applicant proposes to construct
two additional carwash bays on the site; one existing bay will be removed and
reconstructed and one new bay will be added. The applicant proposes a hand
wash carwash facility on the site.
The cars will enter the site and be taken from the customer by a carwash
attendant. The cars will then be moved into the line and vacuumed outside the
building. The cars will then move into one of the carwash bays and be hand
washed. After which the cars will be pulled to the front of the building to be hand
dried.
There are currently eight to ten employees of the business but the applicant
intends to increase that number to ten to fourteen with the proposed addition of
two new wash stalls. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from
8:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Saturday and from 9:00 am through 3:00
pm on Sunday.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As noted previously, the site is currently being used by Gyst Auto Shine and
Detail as a carwash utilizing a single existing building. The area to the north of
the site is residential uses both single-family and duplex housing. There is a
church located to the south of the site across Wright Avenue and a beauty shop
and grocery store located to the west of the site.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, Staff has not received any comments from area residents. The
Central High Neighborhood Association and the Wright Avenue Neighborhood
Association along with 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.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. All previous comment on the proposed development apply: On Wright
Avenue, dedicate right-of-way 30 feet from centerline.
2. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
Wright Avenue and Park Street.
3. 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.
4. Close the driveway on Park Street. All access is to be taken from Wright
Avenue.
5. Driveway locations and width do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Section 30-43 and 31-210. Generally, only a single driveway
apron is allowed with a width not to exceed 36-feet.
6. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
right-of-way prior to occupancy.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 if larger
and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Due to the nature of the processes
used in this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow
preventer assembly will be required on the domestic water service. This device
shall be installed prior to any outlet.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
4
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is located on Bus Route #16 but has no effect on bus radius,
turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has
applied for a revision of an existing Planned Commercial Development for
demolition of an existing car maintenance bay to replace it with two car
maintenance bays.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
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: A six (6) foot high opaque wooden fence with its face side directed
outward is required along the northern perimeter.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the application. Staff presented the item
indicating there was a Planned Development previously approved for the site and
the time frame for submission of the final development plan had expired. Staff
stated the applicant was requesting a very similar site plan to the current
operation and not an automated wash system.
Staff noted comments from the previous Public Hearing. Mr. Dana Carney of the
Planning and Development staff stated the request should be reviewed on its
own merits and not from requirements, which were agreed to at the previous
Public Hearing. Commissioner Rector stated the Commission could require the
additional requirements as before to appease the neighbors. Commissioner
Rector stated it was important for the applicant to contact neighbors to get their
“buy-off” of the proposed project.
Staff stated additional items were needed on the proposed site plan. Staff
requested the applicant indicate the days and hours of operation and the number
of employees on the proposed site plan in the General Notes section. Staff also
requested the dumpster location be shown on the site plan along with the
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
5
required screening. Staff stated any additional site lighting must be low level in
intensity and directional, directed away from residentially zoned properties.
Staff requested all on-site parking be shown on the proposed plan. Staff
questioned if any of the new facilities would be automated car washing facilities.
The applicant stated the site was all hand wash.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the driveway on Park
Street should be removed. The applicant stated the driveway on Park Street was
critical to the flow of traffic onto and from the site. The applicant stated cars
entered the site from the drive on Park Street were taken by an attendant and
driven into the carwash bay, washed and moved to the drying area and then
returned to the customer to exit from the Park Street driveway. The applicant
stated the Wright Avenue drives were less used and primarily by patrons entering
the site from the west. Staff stated, since the drives were existing, the applicant
could maintain all the existing drives on Park Street and on Wright Avenue.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant would be
required to place a six-foot wood fence with its face side directed outward along
the northern property line.
Staff noted comments from all other agencies and suggested the applicant
contact these agencies for further clarification.
There being no further items for discussion. 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 by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
requested the screening fence be joined to the rear of the building and extend
outward to screen the parking areas. The request would allow the rear of the
building to act as the screening fence for the remainder of the site. Staff is
supportive of this request. This will allow for no activity to take place on the
northern portion of the site and in reality the 50-foot lot north of the building will
act as a buffer to the single-family residents to the north.
The revised plan indicated dedication of right-of-way for Wright Avenue and a
20-foot radial dedication at the intersection of Wright Avenue and Park Street.
The applicant has indicated traffic entering and leaving the site from Park Street.
Once the cars enter the site they are taken over by an attendant and routed
through the car washing process. Staff feels since the curb cut is existing and
the site has been functioning with ingress and egress in this manner the curb cut
may continue to exist.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
6
The applicant proposes the days and hours of operation to be from 8:00 am to
6:00 pm Monday through Saturday and 9:00 am to 3:00 pm on Sundays. Staff
feels these hours are conducive to the hours of operation of area businesses and
should have minimal adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The
applicant estimates the number of employees to be from ten to twelve maximum.
Staff feels with the hand washing activity the proposed number of employees
would be required to allow the process to proceed in a timely manner. Staff also
feels the number of employees would not adversely affect the site.
The applicant has not indicated the servicing of the dumpster. Staff feels the
dumpster should be serviced during day light hours only to minimize the negative
impact on neighboring residents.
The ordinance would typically require 22 parking spaces for an automotive
service type use of this size. The proposed site plan indicates nine (9) off-street
parking spaces. Based on the fact that the applicant is proposing extending the
current use of the site and the cars are lined-up to enter the washing stalls the
proposed parking should adequately address the parking requirements for this
development.
There is not any signage proposed as a part of this development. Staff
recommends any future signage be limited to signage allowable in commercial
zones per the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff feels the redevelopment of this site should prove to be a positive aspect for
this general area and should have no adverse effect on the surrounding
properties.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the dumpster be serviced during daylight hours only.
Staff recommends any signage comply with signage allowable in commercial
zones per the Zoning Ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant had failed to notify property owners as required by the Commission’s By-laws.
Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the June 12, 2003
Public Hearing.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6639-A
7
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and
1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-7213
NAME: Mike Berg Company Revised Short-form POD
LOCATION: 17005 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
Mike Berg Company
1725 N. Spruce Street
Little Rock, AR 72207
ENGINEER:
Thomas Engineering
3810 Lookout Road
North Little Rock, AR 72116
AREA: 1.37 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-O
ALLOWED USES: Single use, Professional and General Office
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: Multiple Tenants of Selected Listing of O-1 Office Uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 18,693 dated June 4, 2002 rezoned the site from R-2, Single-family to
PD-O to allow the applicant to convert an existing single-family house into an office to
be used as an insurance sales company. The site is located in the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7213
2
The southern-most area contained a garage (which remains) and two manufactured
homes, which were removed as a part of the development. This area was not included
in the original rezoning nor is this area being considered for rezoning at this time.
The applicant proposed 7 parking spaces in the front of the building, adjacent to
Highway 10. The applicant proposed a 25-foot landscaped area in the front yard with a
single-ground mounted sign.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approved PD-O to POD to allow
more than one user or a combination of users to locate on the site. The
proposed uses include; general or professional office uses, a travel agency, a
photography studio or a massage therapist.
As indicated on the proposed site plan there are a total of seven parking spaces
located on the site. The applicant is not requesting any additional signage or any
change in the hours of operation.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family house, which has been converted into
an office use for an insurance sales office. The area to the east of the site
contains a non-conforming manufactured home park and a non-conforming
veterinary clinic (Town and Country Animal Hospital) adjacent to Cantrell Road in
a converted single-family structure across Drew Lane. The site directly to the
east is also a single-family home with a detached garage in the rear. Uses
across Cantrell Road include office uses (Cingular) and vacant office zoned
property (O-3 and PD-O) with vacant C-2 zoned property to the northeast.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing staff has not received any comment from the neighborhood. All
property owners within 200 feet, all residents within 300 feet who could be
identified and the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association and the
Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. All previous comment apply.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7213
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: All previous comments apply.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All previous comments apply.
Fire Department: No comment.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Office Development to allow multiple uses on the property.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
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 Issues: All previous comments apply.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Mike Berg was present representing the application. Staff stated the site was
previously approved for a single use Planned Development for an office use.
Staff stated the applicant was now requesting to be allowed multiple uses to
locate on the site. Staff stated the request did not include any changes to the
site and from a technical stand point there were no points for discussion. Staff
stated the issue before the Commission was a use issue.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7213
4
Staff suggested Mr. Berg remove the request for a camera shop since the
request could be viewed as a commercial use. Staff stated the other uses
requested did fit the office use category with limited traffic and few parking
spaces required. Mr. Berg stated he would revise his request to only include
those uses Staff felt comfortable with from a traffic generation and parking
demand.
There were no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised cover letter to staff removing the request to
allow a camera shop to locate on the site. The applicant is requesting general
and professional office uses and all other uses are low traffic generators. The
existing parking would allow for multiple uses, no more than two, to locate on the
site and still have adequate parking for guest and customer traffic. The building
has been designed to allow for two offices and the former living area to serve as
a reception area. Other areas of the former home serve as storage and filing
areas. To increase the building to three uses would not be feasible according to
the applicant from a parking standpoint or from allowable space.
The site is currently being used as an insurance office and a massage therapy
clinic. Staff feels these two uses are compatible and should have minimal to no
negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. If the site were to develop
with one of the alternative uses requested (general or professional office uses, a
travel agency, a photography studio) any of these uses would not negatively
impact the area either.
The applicant has not requested any additional signage as a part of the
development. The previous approval included the development of a ground
mounted monument style sign located along Cantrell Road. The sign
constructed was not as approved and the sign is currently in violation and must
be brought into compliance with the approved site plan. There is not any
additional signage being requested as a part of this proposal. Any additional
signage must be accomplished by a shared agreement with the existing
approved single-ground mounted monument style sign or with wall signage as
allowed per the Zoning Ordinance for wall signage allowed in office zones.
Otherwise, to Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with
the proposed request. Staff feels the additional uses would have minimal impact
on the surrounding area if developed with two uses of general and professional
office, a photography studio, a massage therapy clinic or a travel agency.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7213
5
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to revise the PD-O to a POD to allow
multiple uses, no more than two at one time, to locate on the site subject to
compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
The ground mounted sign located on the site must be brought into compliance
with the Highway 10 Design Overlay standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Mike Berg was present representing the applicant. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated there were no additional outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request to
revise the PD-O to a POD to allow multiple uses, no more than two at one time, to
locate on the site subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E
and F of the above report.
Staff stated the ground-mounted sign located on the site must be brought into
compliance with the Highway 10 Design Overlay standards.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
NAME: Highway 10@ Sam Peck Long-form POD
LOCATION: On the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Sam Peck
DEVELOPER:
10@ Sam Peck Office Development
425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 10.7 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: Office uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
In mid-1998, an application was filed to rezone this site from R-2, Single-family to PCD
to allow a mini-warehouse development to located on the rear of the site and a
restaurant seating 200 persons was proposed to be located on the north side fronting
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
2
on Cantrell Road. The application was later withdrawn from consideration prior to the
Planning Commission Public Hearing.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes a preliminary plat and the development of two office
buildings, each on separate lots. The applicant is proposing the development to
occur in two phases. The first phase would be the construction of a 66,000
square foot four story office building and associated parking (234 parking
spaces). The second phase would include a three-story office building consisting
of approximately 50,000 square feet along with the associated parking (230
parking spaces).
The applicant is proposing off-site improvements to include the intersection
improvements, a future traffic signal at Sam Peck and improved drainage. The
total improvements to the site include 116,000 square feet of Class A office
space with 465 parking spaces (4 spaces per 1,000 square feet). The ground
floor of each building will include a drive through facility for a bank or similar
business.
The applicant is requesting the site to be allowed to develop with O-2 and O-3
office uses and fifteen percent of each building on the lower level of each of the
buildings be allowed commercial uses. The applicant has indicated commercial
uses would include: Antique Shop; Bakery or confectionary shop; Barber or
beauty shop; Book or stationary store; Camera shop; Cigar/Tobacco and candy
store; Clothing store; Custom Sewing or millinery; Clinic (medical, dental or
optical); Coffee shop; Delicatessen; Drugstore or pharmacy; Dry cleaning drop
station; Duplication shop; Eating place without drive-in service; Florist shop;
Health studio spa; Jewelry store; Laundry pickup station; Office equipment sales
and service; Optical shop; Photography studio; Restaurant; School (business);
Studio broadcasting or recording; Studio (art, music, speech, drama, dance or
other artistic endeavors). The applicant is requesting up to fifteen percent of
each building be designated as commercial activity. The applicant is also
requesting the flexibility to transfer the commercial uses between the two
buildings.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a cleared vacant tract at the intersection of a principal arterial and a
collector. Street improvements adjacent to the site are not in place on Cantrell
Road or on Sam Peck. Cantrell has been constructed with curb and gutter but
there is not a sidewalk in place adjacent to the site. Sam Peck is unimproved
with open ditches for drainage.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
3
The site is zoned R-2, Single-family and is shown as Transitional on the City’s
Future Land Use Plan. The area to the north is zoned O-2 and also shown as
Transitional on the Ciy’s Future Land Use Plan. This area has developed with
office buildings contains general and professional office uses. Further north, a
MF-12 zoned site containing a church. Also to the north, along Cantrell Road, is
a vacant tract zoned R-2, Single-family and a tract zoned O-3 containing an
existing office building.
Adjoining the site to the west is a small lot zoned POD being used as a dentist
office. To the east of the site, across Sam Peck, is a vacant O-2 zoned piece of
property with a PD-O for an office building located further east. South of the site
has developed as multi-family with two apartment complexes. The Westside
YMCA is located to the southeast of the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Piedmont Property Owners Association, the Pankey Community
Improvement Association and the Walton Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood
Association were of the Public Hearing along with all residents, who could be
identified, located within 300-feet of the site and all property owners located
within 200-feet of the site. As of this writing Staff has received only informational
phone calls from area residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The existing right-of-way widths for Cantrell Road and Sam Peck appear to
meet the Master Street Plan minimums.
2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock code and the Master Street Plan.
3. The proposed driveway locations and widths are acceptable.
4. Extend the proposed highway widening along Cantrell Road east to Sam
Peck Road to provide a right turn lane onto the collector street.
5. Sam Peck Road is classified as a 3-lane collector street. Reconstruction of
the vertical alignment of Sam Peck is required near the intersection of
Cantrell Road. Therefore, Section 30-282 requires an in-lieu contribution of
½ street improvements. As an alternative, construct a two-lane section with
open ditch section to the east. A full three-lane section with curb and gutter
would then be constructed when the property to the east develops.
6. 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.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
4
7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
8. Obtain an NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
9. Alteration of the watercourse will require approval from the Little Rock
District of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to the start of work.
10. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Existing 15” and 8” sewer mains are located on the site.
Relocation of these mains will be required at the Developer’s expense. Contact
Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: A 30-foot easement is required for overhead power in the location of
the line or if the customer prefers to install underground a 10-foot easement will
be required. Contact Entergy at 954-5142 for additional details.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water has been negotiating a
waterline easement and currently has right-of-entry to construct 36-inch and 16-
inch water mains within a 25-foot wide waterline easement across this property.
This easement adjoins the west right-of-way of Sam Peck Road, the south right-
of-way of Cantrell Road and continues south near the westerly boundary of the
property. The proposed monument signs are in conflict with these proposed
water lines. Modifications, of water service layout and the proposed locations of
monument signs, will be required on the plans accompanying the submittal.
Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 to discuss the options available. A
Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to all
connections including metered connections off the fire system. This
development will have minor impact on existing water distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and route.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
5
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Office Development for a new office development.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in
the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan
contains an action statement under the Sustainable Natural Environment Goal
that supports the preservation of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District where
the applicant’s property is located.
Landscape: Areas set-aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
Because the twenty-five (25) foot wide water main easement will envelope the
northern two-thirds (2/3) of the proposed forty (40) foot wide landscape buffer
along Cantrell Road, trees choices must be restricted to the staff’s approved list.
To alleviate some of this concern and to assist with reducing the impact of
proposed parking facing Cantrell Road, several additional interior islands of at
least three hundred (300) square feet should be added.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
southern and western perimeters of the site.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Hank Kelly of Flake and
Kelly were present representing the application. Staff stated the request was for
the land located on the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Sam Peck Road,
a site previously cleared prior to the Land Alteration Ordinance and currently
vacant. Staff stated the request was two fold. Staff stated the request included
a preliminary plat for two lots and a Planned Development for an office
development of two office buildings, each on separate lots.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
6
Staff stated there were additional items needed on the proposed site plan. Staff
stated details of signage were required. Staff stated since the request was for a
Planned Development there were no set ordinance requirements so the intended
signage would have to be specified. Staff also requested any proposed fencing
be shown on the site plan along with details. Staff stated any site lighting must
be low level and directional, directed away from residentially zoned properties.
Staff requested additional items also be shown on the proposed plat. Staff
requested zoning classifications within the proposed plat boundaries and of
abutting areas be shown on the proposed preliminary plat and the names of
owners of all unplatted tracts and tracts in excess of two and one-half acres be
indicated on the proposed preliminary plat.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Sam Peck Road was one
of the roads where a traffic light would be installed by the City. Staff stated the
applicant would be required to install street improvements to off-set the vertical
alignment of Sam Peck Road near the intersection of Cantrell Road.
Staff stated all indicated right-of-ways appeared to meet the minimum required
dedications. Staff also stated a grading permit would be required for the
proposed development. Staff stated the Stormwater Detention Ordinance
applied to the property.
Comments from Central Arkansas Water and the Little Rock Wastewater Utility
were discussed. Staff stated the applicant should contact these agencies
regarding easements. Mr. Daters stated the current owner of the property was
working with the water department with regard to location of the proposed
waterline easement (adjacent to Cantrell Road) and his client was working with
the wastewater utility with regard to the relocation of the wastewater line to the
rear of the property.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the areas set-aside for
landscaping and buffering appeared to meet ordinance requirements. Staff
stated since a water main easement was located in the northern two-thirds of the
proposed forty foot wide landscape buffer along Cantrell Road, trees choices
must be restricted to the Staff approved list. Staff requested the applicant
contact Staff for required plantings around water and wastewater lines. Staff also
stated to soften the impact of the parking area along Cantrell Road, additional
islands of 300 square feet in area should be put in place.
Staff stated the rear property line and the western property line would require
some form of screening. Staff suggested a six-foot wooden fence or dense
evergreen plantings in these areas, which would meet the ordinance
requirement.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
7
Staff also noted comments from Entergy and suggested the applicant contact this
utility with regard to their comment.
There being no further items for discussion, 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 by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
indicated landscaped areas and commented they will work with Staff as far as
the placement of trees in the front 40-foot buffer area. The applicant has also
increased the landscaped islands along the roadway to soften the parking areas
adjacent to Cantrell Road.
The applicant has indicated signage will comply with the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District requirements. The proposal includes signage on each individual
lot near the driveway intersections with Cantrell Road. Staff recommends the
signage be limited to no more than six feet in height and seventy-two square feet
in area, consistent with the Highway 10 Overlay requirement.
The applicant has also indicated Master Street Plan requirements will be installed
on adjacent roadways.
The applicant has indicated on the plat the requested information such as the
zoning within the plat and of abutting properties, owners of parcels adjoining the
site and the drives and parking as cross access.
There are 234 parking spaces proposed on Lot 1 and 230 proposed on Lot 2.
The applicant is requesting a portion of the lower level of each building be
considered for commercial uses. The area being considered as commercial
activity on each lot would be fifteen percent or 9,900 square feet on Lot 1 and
7,500 square feet on Lot 2. If the site were zoned for an office use and an office
building were constructed the applicant would be able to utilize up to ten percent
of the development with accessory commercial uses. For the building on Lot 1
this would result in 6,600 square feet of possible commercial space and 5,000
square feet of possible commercial space on Lot 2. Staff feels the request to
develop the site with no more than fifteen percent of commercial uses on the site
is a reasonable request.
The applicant has indicated one of the potential commercial users to be a
restaurant. This would generate a typical minimum parking requirement of one
space per one hundred square feet of gross floor area. If the site were to
develop with a restaurant on each Lot based on the typical minimum parking
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
8
requirements for an office development and the available gross floor area for a
restaurant use Lot 1 would be nine spaces shy of the typical minimum required
spaces and Lot 2 would exceed the typical minimum required parking by forty–
nine spaces. Based on these assumptions parking is sufficient to meet the
demand.
The applicant is requesting the site be able to develop with O-2 and O-3 uses.
Staff feels this would be too intense a development. The O-2 and O-3 allows for
churches, daycare centers and hospitals. Staff feels this list is too broad and the
development should be limited to general and professional office uses.
The applicant is also request the flexibility to transfer the available percentages
of square footages between buildings. The development is being done as a two
lot plat but as a unified planned office development. Staff feels the allowing the
applicant to transfer the commercial between the two buildings is not a good idea
and should maintain the fifteen percent in each building separately. The result of
the transfer could result in the entire first floor of one of the building being
dedicated to solely commercial uses.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the development should be a quality development
and should not have any adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhoods.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to rezone the site from R-2 to POD to
allow the development to develop with general and professional office uses only
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the Staff report.
Staff recommends allowing up to fifteen percent of each building be allowed
commercial uses as listed the Proposal/Request section of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Hank Kelly of Flake and Kelly
were present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff
stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the proposed
requested rezoning application, as filed, to allow the site to develop as a Planned Office
Development subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and
F of the above report.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5059-A
9
Staff also presented a recommendation that the first floor of each building be allowed
fifteen percent commercial uses limited to those listed in the above Proposal Section
and as amended by the applicant in a letter dated April 23, 2003.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-7380
NAME: Hospice Home Care Long-form POD
LOCATION: 2200 South Bowman Road
DEVELOPER:
Hospice Home Care Inc.
1501 North University Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72207
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
311 President Clinton Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72201
ARCHITECT:
Canino Peckham & Associates, Inc.
10401 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
AREA: 12.99 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: Hospice Home Care Inpatient Clinic, Hospice duplex housing,
Kaleidoscope Center and Hospice Home Care Administrative Offices.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to develop this 12.88 acre site located on South Bowman
Road with several different types of improvements, all with the goal of supporting
and enhancing, the mission of Hospice Home Care, Inc. as that organization
provides much needed hospice services to Little Rock and the surrounding
communities.
The site has approximately 30 feet of fall across 1328.42 feet of depth, making
the slope mild in most instances. There is a significant rise in the Southwestern
corner of the site; however, the developers are not proposing any development in
that area. The applicant has indicated the entire site is enclosed with a six-foot
wood fence with the exception of along South Bowman Road.
There are currently two small, brick houses on the site, in addition to a barn. All
three of these will be demolished. The site also has two existing ponds. One of
these ponds will be utilized as a storm water retention pond for the new
development.
An eight inch sewer line is available along the southwestern part of the site, with
another sewer line across the north and east boundaries. Topography will allow
the development to gravity-feed into the existing sewer line on the southwest
section of the site. Water, power and natural gas are available from existing lines
along Bowman Road. The applicant intends to tie into the existing water line and
place an additional fire hydrant inside the development and water for the required
sprinkler system in the hospice building.
The applicant proposes to phase the development over a ten year period. The
first phase includes the development of a 36-bed inpatient facility. The structure
will be single story to be utilized by patients who have been diagnosed as having
six months or less of life. There are forty-five parking spaces proposed with this
portion of the development. The building is proposed at 25,700 square feet and
32-feet in height.
The second phase will begin in 2006 and include the development of a new
administrative office building with associated education center. The
Administrative Office Building is proposed with 15,400 square feet of building
space and will house all the permanent and part-time staff of Hospice Home
Care, Inc. The facility will include social workers, grief counselors, counseling
rooms, durable medical goods storage, conference rooms, file rooms, computer
center and support space for hospice. The Education Center is proposed as
1760 square feet of building space and will be used as a training center for
volunteers and staff. It will be accessible and available to the community clubs,
introducing them to the hospice campus and providing outreach education to the
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
3
community. There are sixty-one parking spaces proposed with this phase of the
development.
The third phase will consist of the construction of four, 1500 square foot
bungalows. The bungalows will be duplex units which will house terminally ill
patients that are still ambulatory, providing them with an easy transiting onto the
Hospice campus and into the Hospice system. The applicant has indicated the
bungalows will begin construction in 2008.
The applicant is also proposing to construct a Kaleidoscope Center. The building
is proposed as 4500 square feet of building space and a maximum occupancy
load of forty children. The center will service the childcare need of Hospice staff,
as well as residents and caregivers. The center will also provide counseling for
children on issues such as dealing with death of a family member and how to
accept what eventually happens. The activities include painting, role-playing,
reading, and some outdoor activities. The applicant has indicated the estimated
time frame for construction to begin in 2010. There are fourteen parking spaces
proposed with this portion of the development.
The applicant has indicated the concept is to locate facilities that will generate
the most vehicle traffic closest to South Bowman Road. The applicant has also
indicated the private rooms of the Hospice hospital will be located to the rear of
the building to allow patients as much privacy as possible, with visual access to
the existing open space, trees and pond.
The applicant is proposing the placement of a single sign consistent with signage
allowable in office zones (not to exceed six feet in height and sixty-four square
feet in area) near South Bowman Road. The applicant proposes the buildings to
be constructed with brick exterior, shingle roofs and operable windows.
The applicant intends to retain as many of the existing large deciduous trees on
the site as feasible. The applicant has indicated the vast majority of the site will
remain in its current state. The applicant proposes to develop walking trails, with
picnic benches, rest stops, raised planters and memorial gardens. The applicant
has indicated all improvements will be designed with use by the handicapped
and the feeble in mind.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site abuts the Cherry Creek Subdivision to the north and the west and
single-family homes on large lots are located to the south of the site. The
Sandpiper Subdivision is located across South Bowman Road with none of these
homes taking access from South Bowman Road.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
4
The site contains two single-family homes located midway accessed from a
single drive extending from South Bowman Road. There is also a barn located
on the site. The site has a very rural feel and appears to be a former pasture
area with a scattering of trees and the site is fenced with a wire fence commonly
used in ranching. There is a drainage ditch located on the west property line
located at the bottom of a hill.
There is a large grove of small pine trees located on the northern property line
near the backs of the homes off Cherry Bend. There is very little existing
screening located on the northern property line and the site is very visible to the
homes. To the south the vegetation appears to be heavier adjacent to the single-
family homes located on Gilbert.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Point West/Gibralter
Heights/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public
Hearing along with 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. As of
this writing, Staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The proposed right-of-way dedication (30’) and improvements meets Master
Street plan requirement.
2. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
3. A grading permit and development permit for special flood hazard area is
required prior to construction. Show the limits of the flood plain and floodway
on the site plan.
4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
5. Driveway location and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Section 30-43 and 31-210. The driveway must be located
near the center of the frontage and must not exceed 36 feet in width.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, capacity contribution analysis required. Contact
Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
5
Entergy: A 30-foot easement is required for overhead power in the location of
the line or if the customer prefers to install underground a 10-foot easement will
be required. Contact Entergy at 954-5142 for additional details.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: 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 an engineer, licensed to
practice in the State of Arkansas, will inspect installation. Execution of Customer
Owned Line Agreement is required. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to
evaluate this site to determine the fire facilities required. Private fire facilities will
be installed at the Developer’s expense. This development will have minor
impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be
sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protections. Contact Central
Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on
bus radius, turnout and 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 Planned Office Development for a hospice care facility.
The uses proposed with the Planned Development are of a public - quasi-public
nature. The development will be a medical care facility (hospice). Since long-
term medical care (hospitals) are a public use by definition, Staff believes that the
nature of the request is also Public Institutional in nature. Therefore, as with all
Public Institutional uses a Land Use Plan is not required. When Staff conducts
the next land use review of the area, if the development is in place a 'clean-up'
amendment to Public Institutional may be included for the Commission's
consideration at that time.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
6
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: Portions of the land use buffers along the northern and southern
perimeters, drop below the nine (9) foot width minimum. The full width
requirement without transfers is twenty-six (26) feet.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
northern, southern and western perimeters of the site.
Curb and gutter or another approved border is required to protect landscaped
areas from vehicular traffic.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Representatives of the proposed development were present representing the
application. Staff presented the item indicating the request was for a hospice
hospital, administrative office building, duplex bungalows, also for hospice
patients, and a Kaleidoscope Center, a center geared toward terminally ill
children and grief counseling of children who are faced with a terminally ill loved
one or acquaintance. Staff stated the development was to take place in four
phases over a ten year development.
Staff requested the applicant indicate additional items on the proposed site plan.
Staff requested details of any proposed signage, days and hours of operation of
the office building and the Kaleidoscope Center and the proposed location of
dumpster. Staff suggested the applicant revise the site plan to internalize the
parking. Staff stated for the development to be less intrusive to the adjoining
neighborhoods, headlights should not shine into the backs of homes.
Staff also requested the applicant indicate on the proposed site plan any and all
trees the applicant intended to keep on the site. Staff stated screening would be
required along the property lines adjoining single-family zone properties. Staff
stated any additional site lighting must be low level in intensity and directional,
directed away from residentially zoned properties.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
7
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed
development would require a grading permit and the Stormwater Detention
Ordinance applied to the proposed site. Staff questioned where the applicant
intended to store the stormwater and requested the location be identified on the
site plan. Staff stated one-half street improvements would be required to
Bowman Road as indicted on the site plan. Staff stated the driveway should be
relocated to the center of the property.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed buffers
along the northern and southern perimeters appeared to drop below the nine-foot
minimum width. Staff stated the full width required would be twenty-six feet not
considering any transfers allowed. As stated previously Staff once again
reiterated a fence, wall or dense evergreen plantings would be required along the
northern, southern and western perimeters of the site.
Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water, the Little Rock Wastewater
Utility, Entergy and the Little Rock Fire Department. Staff suggested the
applicant contact these agencies for further clarification as to the required
comments.
There was no further discussion. 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 by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has indicated the
development will take place over a ten year period and be constructed in four
phases. Staff is supportive of the phasing plan submitted by the applicant.
The applicant has indicated there will be a single ground-mounted sign located
on the north side of the driveway at the front entrance to the property. The
applicant has indicated the sign will be approximately six feet in height and no
more than sixty-four square feet in area. The sign will be constructed from native
stone with metallic letters and the Hospice Home Care logo.
The applicant proposes the hours of operation for the Office building to be from
8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant proposes the
Kaleidoscope Center will operate from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through
Friday. The applicant has indicated on occasion the building will be used at night
and on weekends for children’s play groups and children’s grief support groups.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
8
The proposed site plan indicates two dumpster locations. One location located
near the hospital and the second location is near the administration building. The
applicant has indicated both locations will be screened as required by the Zoning
Ordinance.
The applicant has also indicated the maximum building height for the inpatient
hospice building will be 32 feet. All other buildings will not exceed 24-feet. Staff
is supportive of the overall building heights and placement on the site plan.
The applicant has indicated an eight foot wooden fence along the north, west and
south property lines. The applicant has also indicated additional dense cypress
will be planted to further buffer the single-family homes in the area. The
applicant has indicated as much as possible of the natural buffer will remain on
the site. The applicant has also stated trees will remain in the site until each
Phase is ready for development. In the first phase, the trees to be removed are
only the trees under the building pad and the trees located in the designated
driveway area.
The applicant has not however moved the driveway to the center of the property.
The applicant has stated the drive has been moved from the southern property
line to the extent possible but with the narrowness of the parcel to move the drive
to the center would interfere with the development of the office building and
parking. The applicant has also stated due to the elevation along Bowman Road
to move the drive any further north would contribute to possible unsafe conditions
for ingress and egress. Staff is supportive of the driveway placement.
Staff is supportive of the proposed development as filed. The applicant has tried
to minimize the negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood by placing the
development away from the adjoining properties. The applicant has also
indicated the eight-foot wooden fence on the northern property line will be
installed prior to construction to aid in the unsightliness of construction to the
adjoining homeowners.
The proposed development should be a quiet use with the Hospice Inpatient
center located on the rear of the development and the duplex bungalows located
adjoining the Cherry Creek Subdivision homes. The administration building will
be located near Bowman Road with the parking for the building located adjacent
to Bowman Road.
The applicant has also stated ambulance service to the site will for the most part
be non-siren service. The applicant has stated on occasion a siren ambulance
may be called but this is rare. The applicant has also stated any site lighting will
be low level and directional, directed inward and away from residentially zoned
properties.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
9
The parking proposed is sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking demand
for a development of this type. The applicant is proposing a total of 128 parking
spaces. The typical minimal parking required would be 106. Staff is supportive
of the proposed parking and the phasing plan of the parking.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed development. If the development is developed as proposed with all
parking internalized and the buffer areas as indicated, the use should be a quiet
use with minimal if any negative impact on the surrounding neighborhoods.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Ms. Lisa Thompson, Chief Operating Office of Hospice Home Care and Mr. Pat
McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers were present representing the
application. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a
recommendation of approval of the requested rezoning subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Mr. Winton McInnis addressed the Commission stating he was not opposed to the
Hospice development but he did question if allowing this use in the area opened the
door for multi-family development. He stated the Land Use Plan indicated single-family
for the site as well as the area to the south of the proposed development. He
questioned allowing non-residential uses to located in a exclusively single-family
neighborhood.
Staff stated the Land Use Plan was not being changed only the zoning. Staff stated this
would protect the area from becoming non-residential since the Land Use Plan was a
guide for zoning.
Mr. Mitch Cook spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated the
development was not residential but a commercial use. He questioned the clear-cutting
of trees, which would affect the ozone and the driveway location. He stated at the
current location there was a sight distance problem for persons exiting the site.
Mr. Cook also stated he realized the day care was for hospice children but he
questioned the noise of the facility.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7380
10
Mr. McGetrick stated the driveway had been relocated to the south as far as feasible to
allow for an increased sight distance for persons entering and exiting the site. He
stated the development would only clear the trees necessary for construction of the
current phase. He stated trees in phase four would remain until construction was
imitate for the fourth phase. Mr. McGetrick stated the daycare had been situated as on
the southern portion of the site away from the Cherry Creek Subdivision. He stated the
residential portion of the development was located nearer the homes of the subdivision.
Ms. Thompson stated although she did not have elevations for the proposed
development the design was residential in character. She stated across the country
the trend was to located facilities of this type in residential neighborhoods and to
develop the site with the sensitivity of the neighborhoods in mind.
A motion was made to approve the proposed development as filed to include all staff
comments and recommendations. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and
1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-7381
NAME: Heifer Project International Long-form POD and Street Right-of-way
abandonment for a portion of Industrial Drive and Shall Street
LOCATION: South of East 2nd Street between Industrial Drive and John Street
DEVELOPER:
Heifer International
1015 Louisiana Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
McClelland Consulting Engineers
900 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
ARCHITECT:
Polk Stanley Yeary Architects, LTD
700 South Schiller Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 22 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 150
CURRENT ZONING: I-3, Industrial District
ALLOWED USES: Heavy Industrial
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: Heifer International Office Building and Future Global Village
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to develop this twenty-two acre site as the Heifer
International Center, which will be developed in four phases. The applicant
intends the first phase to be the construction of the headquarters building. The
building will contain approximately 98,000 square feet with four floors of about
23,750 square feet each, and a basement level with 3,000 square feet. The
initial occupancy of the building in early 2005 will be 250, with an ultimate
population planned of 450 in 2009.
The applicant is requesting approval of the first phase of the project. The
additional phases will be brought before the Commission as the final plans are
firmed up.
The Phase I development and related site development, including parking, have
been located to avoid the environmentally contaminated brownfield of the old
railroad switching yard which bisects the site. The brownfield area will be re-
mediated and reclaimed during the construction process to create an important
component of Phase Two. The Phase One perimeter lies at the edge of this
abandoned rail yard, and the new construction will sit on redeveloped ground
where existing warehouses and industrial structures are presently being
demolished.
The Phase II Welcome Center Pavilion will contain dining facilities, galleries for
temporary exhibits, a gift shop, and meeting/seminar spaces designed to serve
and educate the public. The extensive use of recycled construction materials in
the building structure, and placement within a constructed wetland on a
reclaimed site that was formerly a brownfield, will demonstrate the environmental
development strategies. The Pavilion will also provide support space and rest
areas for activities in the Commons, as well as the entry/exit point for visitors to
the Phase Three Global Village education experience.
The Global Village will be an interactive learning environment that will give
visitors a glimpse into the cultures of eight countries around the world where
Heifer and other humanitarian organizations have operations and programs.
Initiatives in the United States will also be featured. It is hoped that this
experience will encourage the visitor to become involved with supporting
sustainable and compassionate solutions for solving world hunger.
Representative village and environments of the countries will be structured
around a support facility containing livestock housing and care facilities, and
mechanical/electrical operational systems. Because animals are such an
essential component of its mission and program, Heifer is working with the City of
Little Rock to include hoofed animals on the site.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
3
The Phase Four development includes the Global Solutions and Sustainable
Farm Complex. The project will display and test the newest methods and
technologies of environmentally responsible agricultural and livestock production.
At this time, the land for this final phase is not actually owned by Heifer, but is
secured for future development under a six-year option. This parcel is not part of
the re-zoning request, but is shown for reference and information.
The applicant is proposing environmentally friendly design with regard to parking
lot paving, landscaping, stormwater collection and building design. The overall
goal of the parking lot is to create new standard for parking lot design that is
much more than just an area that holds vehicles. The parking lot will create an
experience that combines educational and environmentally friendly additions to
the site instead of the more common large concrete or asphalt slab. The parking
lot will be designed using a variety of surfaces to showcase different materials
and to include creative ideas on stormwater runoff and collection. Currently the
Little Rock Code requires all parking lots to be surfaced with concrete or asphalt.
The Heifer project is designed with a 51% permeable parking lot surface. The
permeable surfaces will include brick pavers and reinforced gravel paving
products that help the stormwater runoff permeate back into the groundwater
tables. These products will help eliminate many of the common stormwater
runoff problems that are generated by impervious surfaces such as concrete and
asphalt. The permeable surface will be primarily limited to the light vehicular
areas of the site. The site will also incorporate impervious pavements such as
traditional reinforced concrete and a relatively new product, resinpave. The
reinforced concrete will be the primary surface for all locations where heavy
vehicular traffic will be expected. The resinpave will be used as an
environmentally friendly substitute for asphalt and will be limited to locations
where light vehicular loads are planned. The parking lot will be designed for 199
vehicles and will include six handicapped spaces and a variety of other dedicated
spaces for carpooling alternative fuel and electric car spaces. The future Global
Village development on the site will result in additional parking needs and site
work being added to support the expected visitors.
The Global Village and the associated site work area has not been shown in
detail, but it will be developed and submitted to the Planning Commission for
review in the future. However, in conjunction with the current development, the
applicant is requesting a deferral of all road improvements along the boundaries
of the Future Global Village; specifically the area along East 2nd Street and John
Street. The improvements along East 2nd and John Streets are not the only
street improvements that are planned in the area. Heifer International teamed
with the City of Little Rock to obtain a grant from the Economic Development
Administration (EDA) will construct improvements along 3rd Street and a new
road that will connect East 3rd Street on the west to Shall Street on the south.
The plans also allow for follow up work that would continue the new road further
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
4
to the east. As a part of this request, the applicant has submitted a request for
right-of-way abandonment for a portion of Industrial Drive and Shall Street.
In addition to the creative use of the materials in the parking lot, the parking lot
will serve a second purpose. The parking area will also serve as a stromwater
filter and harvesting system. The plans will show how the parking area will
collect, filter and capture the surface water and then harvest it for different uses
on the site. The pervious surfaces will significantly decrease the stormwater
runoff. The water will then travel through the filter media and migrate on the
surface and through the subgrade to landscaped areas called bioswales. The
bioswales will further the filtration process and also serve as small detention
areas that will hold the water before it is collected in traditional storm drainage
structures and piping. The filtered stormwater will then be transmitted by
conventional methods to a lift station and a basin that will store stormwater for
irrigation and other uses. The basin will also serve as a source for most of the
water necessary to maintain the constructed wetlands and water channels that
surround a portion of the office building.
The applicant has indicated a variety of design issues that are still being
evaluated and many issues that are still to be resolved through the design
process. In very wet weather any excess water will be diverted to the city storm
drainage system through a bypass pipe. In arid weather, a recharge irrigation
well will be activated to provide a nonpotable water source to maintain the
irrigation and wetland systems.
A wetland will be constructed around the proposed building to act as stormwater
filtering and storage for site irrigation. Along the northeast side of the building the
wetland shall be informal consisting of water channels from 3” to 10” deep. The
constructed wetland will be constructed and hold water through the use of a 45
mil EPDM liner with 12” clay seal. The north channel will have a constant water
depth of 12” while the south channel will have a constant channel water depth of
3”. In addition, native stone edge will act as the channel edge and transition to
the landscaped areas.
The building is being designed to use 51% less energy than a converntional
office building of similar program and size. The building’s shape takes
advantage of the solar orientation by stretching in an east/west direction, which
allows for the greatest amount of sunlight into the building throughout daylight
hours in each season.
A narrow floorplate (only 62 feet wide) further enables natural light to penetrate to
the center of every floor. Roof slopes direct rainwater to collection drains and
piping systems that store and reuse this natural source as “gray water” within the
building. Sunlight will be converted into electricity by utilizing a collection system
embedded in an amorphous photovoltaic membrane on the roof. To maximize
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
5
this collection, the roof is angled to receive the most sunlight for the Little Rock
solar orientation. This curved structure, and the angled shape of the roof, will
create a distinctive building form that will give Heifer a readily identifiable profile
in downtown Little Rock.
The building’s gentle curve emanates from the overall master plan for the site,
which is conceived as a series of concentric rings that expand outward from a
central commons, or gathering space. This concentric ring plan is a physical
manifestation of a basic core belief of the Heifer mission, the concept of “passing
on the gift”. The simple act of generosity sets in motion a cycle of renewal by
which a single animal, first given to one family, can then be nurtured to provide
sustenance many times over as each subsequent family receives the
generational offspring from that initial gift. This concentric ring concept will be
incorporated in the Heifer International Center design. The Entrance Commons,
where the public will first begin the educational experience, radiating out from the
Entrance Commons, the pedestrian ring, the Welcome Center ring, the wetland
ring, the Office Building Ring, and the vehicular traffic rings.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Most if not all the structures on the site and on the site to the northeast have
been demolished with the new President Clinton Library project currently
underway to the northeast of the site.
All streets in the area (John Street, Shall Street, Industrial Drive and East 4th
Street) are substandard with no curb, gutter or sidewalk. The only street
improvements are located along East 2nd Street and those are minimal adjacent
to the site. The sidewalk has been installed but is broken (in places) as well as
the curb has been installed and is also broken (in places). The area to the north
does have street improvements installed, which were constructed with the
redevelopment of the County Health Unit and the Dempsey redevelopment.
Other uses to the north include vacant R-4 zoned property and the Fraternal
Order of the Police Lodge.
To the east of the site are large warehouse distribution facilities; 3 State Supply
Company and Harbor Distributing. Uses to the south are also a mix of
warehouse wholesale supply companies. East of the site are once again
wholesale warehouse activities including Sterling Paint, a plumbing supply
company and an electrical supply company. The Arkansas Democrat Gazette
printing facility is located to the east of the Presidential Library project which
abuts the northeastern boundary.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
6
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Hanger Hill and East Little Rock Neighborhood Associations along with all
owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located
within 300-feet of the site, who could be identified, were notified of the Public
Hearing. As of this writing, Staff has not received any comments from area
residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A dedication of right-of-way of 60 feet from the proposed road along the south
property line is required.
2. 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.
3. Storm water detention facilities are being provided with the proposed
development.
4. Close the eastern-most driveway. The location, width and geometry does not
meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Section 30-43 and 31-
210.
5. Boundary streets: The developer would be required to improve all streets that
abut the proposed development to Master Street Plan standards. This would
include John Street, 2nd Street, a portion of 4th Street, and possibly a portion
of Industrial Drive. These streets must be improved with the initial
development, or in accordance with a phasing plan approved by the
Commission.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Existing sewer main on site. Abandonment and installation of
new main at the Developer’s expense will be required. Contact Little Rock
Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Easements required. Contact Entergy at 954-5151 for additional
details.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
7
Central Arkansas Water: The waterline in 3rd Street Extension will become a
private line as it enters the Heifer Property. The 8-inch water main in EDA Grant
Road must be tied into the existing water main in Shall Street. The Little Rock
Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional
public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. This development will have
minor impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will
be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is located on Bus Route #12 and has no effect on bus radius,
turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-30 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use Urban for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Office Development for a new office building.
The request is consistent with the Planned Office Development part of Mixed Use
Urban. However the specifics of the Planned Office Development should be
reviewed against the design characteristics proposed for the Mixed Use Urban
land use classification.
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 proposed street buffer along EDA Grant Road drops below the
minimum width requirement of fifteen (15) feet and nine (9) inches. The average
width requirement being thirty-one (31) and one-half (1/2) feet. This takes into
account the reduction allowed within the designated mature area.
Areas set aside for landscaping meet with Landscape Ordinance requirements
with the reductions allowed within the designated mature area.
Wheel stops will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic.
Irrigation to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to submit landscape plans
stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
8
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Representatives of the applicant were present representing the application. Staff
introduced the item giving an overview of the proposed development. Staff
stated the applicant was requesting a Planned Office Development to allow
Heifer International to construct their corporate offices on the site in Phase I.
Staff stated future phases included additional construction on the site one of
which is a Global Village. Staff stated the Commission would review all
additional phases as plans were finalized.
Staff stated the request also included the closure of a portion of Shall Street and
a portion of Industrial Drive. Staff stated the request was for closing of the
portions of these streets within the applicant’s property.
Staff stated the proposed development included innovative designs with regard
to parking lot pavement and stormwater detention. Staff stated the applicant
intended to capture as much of the stormwater as feasible to water landscaped
areas. Staff stated the use of pervious pavement materials would be utilized to
reduce runoff from the site.
Staff requested additional items be shown on the proposed site plan. Staff stated
the maximum building height should be included on the plan. Mr. Beranek of
McClelland Engineers stated the maximum building height would be between
sixty-five and seventy feet. He stated the building was to be a four story building
with fifteen feet per floor and a water tower extending from the roof. He stated he
would confirm the height and include the height as requested.
Staff also requested details of any proposed fencing (height/material), signage
(height/area/location) and any dumpster locations. Staff requested the applicant
provide the days and hours of operation for the proposed development.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed right-of-way
of the future EDA road appeared to meet the minimum requirements. Staff
questioned what portion of the road would be constructed. Mr. Beranek stated
the road would be built to the intersection with Shall Street. Public Works staff
stated one-half street improvements would be required to extend beyond Shall
Street to the eastern edge of the applicant’s property. Staff also requested the
applicant remove the eastern-most drive from the proposed site plan. Staff
stated the drive did not meet ordinance spacing requirements.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
9
Mr. Beranek stated the applicant was also requesting a deferral of Boundary
Street improvements per the Master Street Plan to adjoining streets until future
phases developed. Staff stated improvements would be required to 2nd Street,
John Street and 4th Street at the time of such development. Staff questioned if
Industrial Drive would remain as a dedicated street. Mr. Beranek stated it would
not and that the petition to close Industrial Drive should include the section of
Industrial Drive from 2nd Street through the applicant’s property to Shall Street.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed buffer along
the future EDA Road did not meet the minimum required width. Staff stated the
minimum width required was fifteen feet and nine inches. Staff stated the
average width required would be thirty-one feet and one-half inches. Staff stated
the required buffer did take into account the reduction allowed in the designated
mature area. Staff stated all other areas of proposed landscaping appear to
meet the minimum requirements per the ordinances.
Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water and the Little Rock
Wastewater Utility. Staff suggested the applicant contact these agencies for
additional information.
There were no additional items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded
the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised by
Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has removed the
eastern-most driveway location as requested by Staff. The applicant has also
indicated the required right-of-way dedication. The applicant has indicated
boundary street improvements to East 2nd Street, John Street and 4th Street will
be constructed with Phase III of the development ( the future Global Village).
The City has secured funding from the Economic Development Administration for
construction of the new roadway to connect East 3rd Street to Shall Street. The
road will extend from the current terminus and be routed along the western edge
of the Heifer property and curve at the southern boundary and extend east to the
eastern property line. The road is shown on the Master Street Plan to extend
easterly to the intersection with 6th Street but is not being considered as a part of
this funding or this project.
The applicant has indicated coordination with the water and sewer utilities will be
done at the time of development to relocate and extend a new sewer main and to
relocate and extend the new water mains in the area. Funding for the
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
10
wastewater improvements are included in the funding from the Economic
Development Administration (EDA) included in the funding for the new road.
The applicant has indicated the building will be a four (4) story building with an
average mean elevation of the building to be a maximum of 82-feet and 8-inches.
This height is taller than allowed in the UU District (5 stories and 75-feet in height
whichever is less). Staff feels the building height should not have any adverse
impact on the surrounding area. For the most part uses in the area are industrial
uses. The added height of the building will be in a water tower added to the roof
of the structure.
The applicant is proposing the placement of 199 parking spaces on the site. The
typical minimal parking requirement for an office building of this size would be
245 spaces. Staff feels the proposed parking is adequate to meet the parking
demand at this time. The applicant is proposing the insulation of additional
parking with future phases to alleviate any future parking concerns.
The applicant is proposing the placement of a sign to be located along the future
EDA Road. The applicant has not indicated any proposed signage details
(height/area). The applicant has indicated signage is proposed to be located
near the East 3rd Street entrance and the Shall Street entrance. Staff would
recommend the signage comply with signage allowed in office zones or six feet
in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff would also recommend any
wall signage comply with wall signage allowed in office zones.
The applicant proposes the days and hours of operation to be from 8:00 am to
5:00 pm daily. The hours for future phases have not yet been established and
will be reviewed by the Commission as future Phases develop. The applicant
proposes the building occupancy to be 450 employees at full development in
2009.
The applicant has indicated wheel stops will be placed on the site to protect
landscaped areas. The applicant has also indicated an irrigation system will be
provided to water landscaped areas. The applicant is requested a reduced
street buffer along the future EDA Grant Road. The required minimum width of
the street buffer is fifteen feet and nine inches. The proposed width is fourteen
feet and six inches. Staff is supportive of the request to reduce the landscape in
this area to the width requested by the applicant.
Otherwise, to Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with
the proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to rezone the site to
allow Heifer International to construct their corporate offices on the site.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7381
11
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested POD subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends all signage comply with signage allowed in office zones per
the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow a reduced buffer along the
future EDA Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant’s were present representing the proposed application. Staff stated to
their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed
request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested POD subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested street right-of-way
abandonment of the portion of Industrial Drive and the portion of Shall Street requested
by the applicant.
Staff recommended all signage comply with signage allowed in office zones per the
Zoning Ordinance and the request to allow a reduced buffer along the future EDA Road.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-7382
NAME: Best Short-form PID
LOCATION: 3115 Madison Street
DEVELOPER:
Robert W. Best
3115 Madison Street
Little Rock, AR 72204
ENGINEER:
Edward Lofton
Engineering and Surveying
15415 Oak Crest
Little Rock, AR 72206
AREA: 0.49 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
ALLOWED USES: General Retail
PROPOSED ZONING: PID
PROPOSED USE: C-3 Uses and a welding shop/artist studio
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the site from C-3, General Commercial to PID
to allow the site to be used for a variety of uses. The site currently contains a
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7382
2
single-family residence on the northern boundary. The residence is occupied as
a rental unit. There is a 5500 square foot concrete block and brick construction
building located on the site. The primary building is proposed to be used by the
applicant as a welding shop/artist studio. The applicant has indicated there are
no employees for his business. Projects include sculptures, custom furniture
and unique pieces that are normally commissioned by individuals, designers and
architects. The applicant proposes the placement of a sculpture garden on a
vacant portion of the site and adjacent to the single-family home located on the
northern boundary.
There is also a 455 square foot concrete building located on the site. The
applicant has indicated the building is currently vacant but could be renovated
and made available for a small office use or additional studio space.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family home, a non-residential structure
being used by the applicant has a welding shop/artist studio and a vacant
concrete building. The site is fenced with a six-foot chain link fence around the
non-residential portion of the site with the exception of the concrete building.
The street has been installed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk is in place.
The area to the north of the site is single-family homes with only one of the
homes vacant and boarded. Uses along Asher Avenue include a variety of
commercial uses such as a pawn shop, a service station, two tire stores, a night
club and a furniture store. A large food distribution company is located across
Asher Avenue to the southwest. To the west of the site there is a fenced area
with trucks both regular size and large trucks and the old feed mill with portions
still standing.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Curran Conway and the South of Asher Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the Public Hearing, 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. As of this writing, Staff has not received
any comment from area residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The proposal apparently involves no new construction. No comment on the
proposed change in use.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7382
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 if larger
and/or additional water meter(s) are required. The existing main serving this
facility is 2-inch. A larger main would be required to support a meter larger than
¾-inch or to support a fire hydrant. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to
evaluate this site to determine whether additional fire hydrant(s) are required. If
additional fire hydrant(s) are required, the hydrants, along with any water mains
need to support those hydrants, will be installed at the Developer’s expense.
This development will have minor impact on existing water distribution system. If
additional water facilities are required, they will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is located on Bus Route #14 and #16 and has no effect on bus
radius, turnout and route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Multi-family and Commercial for this property. The
applicant has applied for a Planned Industrial Development for a welding art
studio.
The requested Planned Industrial Development is for predominately Commercial
uses with a request for a specific Industrial use related to the proposed art studio.
Staff believes that this makes the PID consistent with the Commercial
designation of the Plan. Since this is one development, of which only a small
portion is not within the Commercial area; a Land Use Plan is general in nature;
and existing structures will be maintained a Plan Amendment is not required for
that portion within the area shown for Multi-family use.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7382
4
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in
the area covered by the Oak Forest Neighborhood Action Plan. This
neighborhood action plan does not contain any goals, objectives, or action
statements relevant to this application.
Landscape: No comment.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 10, 2003)
Mr. Robert Best was present representing the application. Staff stated the issue
was an enforcement case. Staff stated the applicant was relocated from the
industrial areas east of I-30 as a result of the Heifer project. Staff stated they had
worked with the applicant to find a site suitable for his business and he had
bought the site with an understanding is use was an allowable use for the zoning.
Staff stated the site was zoned C-3, General Commercial and a welding shop
was not an allowable use. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a Planned
Industrial Development to allow his use, a welding shop and artist studio, and
C-3 uses as alternative uses for the site.
Staff requested Mr. Best provide some additional information as a part of his
proposal. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation,
any future employees and details of the existing fencing. Staff also requested
the applicant furnish any existing or proposed signage along with details
(height/area/location). Staff also requested the applicant locate any on-site
dumpsters and provide the required screening on the site plan.
Staff suggested the applicant limit the use of the smaller building located on the
site to a quiet office use or an artist studio. Staff stated parking requirements
would limit the use of the building for any commercial type business.
Staff suggested the applicant contact Central Arkansas Water for additional
details concerning their comments.
There were no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted revised plans to Staff addressing most of the concerns
raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee members. The applicant has
indicated the days and hours of operation to be Monday through Friday from 8
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7382
5
am to 5 pm and occasionally on weekends. The applicant has also stated there
are to be no future employees of his business.
There is an existing six foot chain link fence along the street side of the
development and separating the shop area from the single-family home. The
applicant proposes the fence to remain.
The applicant has also stated no signage is proposed as a part of this
development. Staff would recommend any future signage be approved as a
single ground mounted sign as allowed in commercial zones, not to exceed
thirty-six feet in height and one hundred-sixty square feet in area.
The applicant has indicated deliveries to the site are made through UPS or a
small delivery truck. The site is equipped with a loading dock, which would allow
deliveries to be made off the street.
The applicant has indicated there are three on-site parking spaces, which back
onto Madison Street. Since this is an existing condition Staff would support this
activity continuing. The applicant has also indicated there will not be an on-site
dumpster.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Although there are single-family homes located to the north of
the site the use is limited to normal business hours and should not have any
adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood. In addition there will be
limited traffic accessing the site which too will not have any adverse impact on
the surrounding area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
Staff recommends the site be limited to having one ground-mounted sign not to
exceed 36-feet in height and 160 square feet in area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated to their knowledge
there were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff
presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7382
6
Staff also presented a recommendation that the site be limited to having one ground-
mounted sign not to exceed 36-feet in height and 160 square feet in area.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chairman placed the item for inclusion
of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: G-25-187
Name: Asher Avenue; Street Name Change
Location: Asher Avenue; west of University Avenue to
the Colonel Glenn – Stagecoach Intersection
Petitioner: Asher Avenue Planning Committee
Request: To change the name of that portion of Asher
Avenue located west of University Avenue to
Colonel Glenn Road
Abutting Uses and Ownership:
This densely developed stretch of Asher Avenue is adjacent to 132 businesses
and single family residences; 240 occupied apartments, in two complexes; and
26 occupied mobile-manufactured homes. A total of 398 businesses –
individuals take an address from this portion of Asher Avenue.
Neighborhood Effect:
398 individuals and businesses will be affected by the street name change. By
changing the name to Colonel Glenn Road and tying it to the existing Colonel
Glenn Road, the street number will remain the same for all affected parties. The
post office will honor the old addresses for one year, giving adequate time for all
parties to make the transition to the new street name.
Neighborhood Position:
The petition drive was initiated by the Asher Planning Committee; a grass roots
organization formed in the spring of 2001. The Committee consists of area
business and property owners and members of the two area neighborhood
associations; Westwood and John Barrow. Early-on, the committee stated one
of its goals in an effort to enhance the area’s reputation was to rename the street.
From February through early March 2003, the Committee gathered 204
signatures of those in support of the proposed name change. The signatures
represent 119 businesses and homes and 85 residents of apartments and mobile
homes. The proposed street name change is also supported by the
management of the two large apartment complexes in the 6200-6300 Blocks of
Asher Avenue; Chateau West and Chateau DeVille.
Effect on Public Services:
No opposition to the proposed name change has been voiced by any of the
reviewing agencies. Approximately 26 street name signs will need to be
changed, at an estimated cost to the City of $3,850.00.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-25-187
2
Staff Analysis:
The Asher Avenue Planning Committee is requesting that the name of that
portion of Asher Avenue located west of University Avenue be changed to
Colonel Glenn Road. The street connects to the existing Colonel Glenn Road, at
the Asher/Colonel Glenn/Stagecoach split.
In the spring of 2001, the Committee was formed for the purpose of
strengthening and enhancing the area along the western leg of the Asher Avenue
corridor. The Committee is comprised of area business and property owners and
representatives of the two area neighborhood associations; Westwood and John
Barrow. The Committee has met on a regular basis and has kept area residents
and businesses informed of its actions through news letters.
Early after its formation, the Committee set as one of its goals the renaming of
this portion of Asher Avenue. The Committee saw the current widening and
improving of Asher Avenue as an opportunity to change the street name. The
Committee feels there is some stigma that has become attached to the name
Asher Avenue over the past decades. During discussions with staff of several
proposed names, Colonel Glenn Road was suggested and agreed to. Asher
Avenue, an east-west road, connects with Colonel Glenn, also an east-west
road, at the Asher Avenue/Colonel Glenn/Stagecoach split. By selecting Colonel
Glenn, it will not be necessary to renumber the street addresses of all affected
parties. The image of Colonel Glenn extending through the area to the freeway
interchange at I-430 was also appealing to the Committee.
From February through early March 2003, the Committee gathered 204
signatures representing more than 50% of the 398 individuals and businesses
located along this portion of Asher Avenue. Some 240 of the 398 are located in
two large apartment complexes, Chateau West and Chateau DeVille. Although
only 85± of the apartment residents signed the petition, the management of both
complexes is in support of the proposed name change.
In 1913, the Little Rock City Council renamed 19th Street, also known as the Hot
Springs Pike, to Asher Avenue in honor of former Pulaski County Judge Joseph
Asher. Mr. Asher served as deputy county clerk, county clerk and county judge.
He was responsible for reforms in highway construction and county
administration and was known as a “good roads enthusiast.” Colonel Glenn
Road, formerly known as the Upper Hot Springs Highway, was named in honor
of astronaut John Glenn.
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-25-187
3
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 10, 2003)
Several members of the Asher Avenue Planning Committee were present. Staff
presented the item. The Committee presented a package of information showing
the history of the Committee and its actions leading to the filing of the street
name change petition. There was no further discussion.
The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF RECOMMEDATION:
Staff is not opposed to the proposed name change. Staff feels it is appropriate to
note that the cost for changing the street name signs approaches $4,000.00,
which may be an issue.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The Asher Avenue Planning Committee members were present. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.
Harold Majors, Chairman of the Planning Committee, spoke in support of the
proposal. He stated the Committee felt there would be an advantage to having a
direct link to I-430. Mr. Majors made note of the several improvements that had
already taken place in the area.
Chairman Nunnley asked if consideration had been given to changing the name
of the entire length of Asher Avenue. Mr. Majors responded that there were early
discussions with a committee working east of University Avenue but there was no
follow-through by that group.
Chairman Nunnley asked Mr. Majors if he could quantify why he felt the name
change would enhance the area or if a marketing study had been done.
Mr. Majors responded that years of unfavorable activities had led to the street
having a bad reputation. He stated a marketing study was being conducted in
conjunction with UALR.
Commissioner Rahman stated the City was currently in the process of studying
the Asher Corridor, east of University Avenue. He stated there might be a name
change proposal for that portion at a later date.
A motion was made to approve the name change. The motion was approved by
a vote of 8 ayes, 2 noes and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 15
Issue: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments related to Bills of Assurance
Source: Board of Directors and Neighborhood Connections Subcommittee
Staff Report:
In response to concerns raised by several citizens and neighborhood
associations, the Board of Directors directed staff to review the Zoning Ordinance
provisions related to Planning Commission consideration of Bills of Assurance
when considering applications for use change. There currently are no such
provisions. In concert with a subcommittee of the Neighborhood Connections
organization, staff specifically reviewed the Zoning Ordinance provisions related
to Special Use Permits, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permits and Planned
Developments. Staff believes it is appropriate for the Commission to consider
but not be bound by the lawful provisions of a valid bill of assurance for the
subdivision within which the subject property is located when determining the
appropriateness of the proposed use change.
Consequently, staff has prepared the following changes to the Zoning Ordinance:
1. Special Use Permits
Amend Section 36-54 (b) by adding a new sentence to be inserted after the word
“authority” in line #7 to read: “The Planning Commission shall consider, but shall
not be bound by, the lawful provisions of a valid bill of assurance for the
subdivision within which the subject property is located when determining the
appropriateness of the proposed special use.”
2. Rezoning
Amend Section 36-83 “guidelines for decision” by adding a new sentence to be
inserted after the word “interest” on line #11 to read: “The Planning Commission
shall consider, but shall not be bound by, the lawful provisions of a valid bill of
assurance for the subdivision within which the subject property is located when
determining the appropriateness of the proposed special use.”
3. Conditional Use Permits
Amend Section 36-101 “general purpose” by adding a new sentence to be
inserted after the word ‘section’ on line #13 to read: “The Planning Commission
shall consider, but shall not be bound by, the lawful provisions of a valid bill of
May 1, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.)
2
assurance for the subdivision within which the subject property is located when
determining the appropriateness of the proposed conditional use.”
4. Planned Developments
Amend Section 36-460 (a) “development standard, conditions and review
guidelines” by adding a new sentence after the word “neighborhood” on line #7 to
read: “The Planning Commission shall consider, but shall not be bound by, the
lawful provisions of a valid bill of assurance for the subdivision within which the
subject property is located when determining the appropriateness of the
proposed PUD or PD.”
Amend Section 36-456 (1) “submission requirements” by adding a new
subsection to be subsection (f) to read as follows: “The applicant shall submit a
copy of a valid bill of assurance for the subdivision within which the subject
property is located.”
The proposed changes were reviewed and endorsed by the Neighborhood
Connections subcommittee on March 13, 2003 and by the Plans Committee of
the Planning Commission on March 26, 2003.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance Amendments.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
Staff presented the item. There was no further discussion. The item was placed
on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 1, 2003
ITEM NO.: 16
Issue: Proposed Planning Commission Bylaw Amendment
Staff Report:
At the direction of the Planning Commission, the Plans Committee conducted a
review of the Commission’s Bylaws at its March 26, 2003 meeting. The
Committee was tasked with reviewing the order of public hearings.
The Committee determined that the current order of business stipulated in the
Bylaws needed only one change. The Committee suggests that Article V,
Section B.5. be amended to add new language and to read as follows:
5. The petitioner or applicant will then be recognized by the Chair. A
total of twenty (20) minutes shall be allotted for presentation. The
applicant may reserve a portion of that twenty (20) minutes to
respond to issues and concerns raised by objectors and other
interested parties.
The Committee felt that the public hearings would be conducted in an efficient
manner, if the Bylaws, as amended, were adhered to.
As required by the Bylaws, the proposed amendment to Article V, Section B.5.
was presented in writing at the April 13, 2003 Commission meeting to be placed
on a subsequent agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 1, 2003)
The Bylaw Amendment was presented. There was no further discussion. The
item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.