HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_10 16 2003sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
OCTOBER 16, 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
Bob Lowry
Robert Stebbins
Norm Floyd
Bill Rector
Rohn Muse
Gary Langlais
Fred Allen, Jr.
Jerry Meyer
Members Absent: Mizan Rahman
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the September 4, 2003 Meeting of the
Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were
approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
OCTOBER 16, 2003
4:00 P.M.
I. DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Callaghan Creek Preliminary Plat (S-1385), located north of Raines Road,
east of the Sullivan Road intersection.
B. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-01-03) in the River Mountain
Planning District, located south of County Farm Road near the intersection
with River Valley Marina Road, a change from Single Family and
Park/Open Space to Commercial.
B.1. River Harbor Long-form PCD (Z-7412), located on County Farm Road,
east of River Valley Marina Road.
C. An Ordinance to Amend Ordinance No. 16,968 to allow for the installation
of a self-closing gate for the back entrance of Otter Creek Subdivision,
located across Wimbledon Loop in the Otter Creek Subdivision.
D. Culzean Estates Preliminary Plat (S-1398), located on the north side of
David O Dodd Road, east of I-430.
E. Culzean Estates Subdivision Recreational Facilities Conditional Use
Permit (Z-7473), located on the north side of David O Dodd Road, east of
I-430.
F. Watershed Project Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1400), located on
Springer Boulevard, south of I-440.
II. REGULAR AGENDA:
1. The Reserve at Chenal Valley Apartments Subdivision Site Plan Review
(S-867-CCCCC), located on Tract 75A Chenal Valley, south of Rahling
Road.
2. The Villages of Wellington Phase XI-B Preliminary Plat (S-1042-DD),
located on the northwest corner of Wellington Village Road and Wellington
Plantation Drive.
3. The Villages of Wellington Phase XI-A Preliminary Plat (S-1042-EE),
located on the northwest corner of Wellington Village Road and Wellington
Plantation Drive.
Agenda, Page Two
II. REGULAR AGENDA: (CONT.)
4. Gill Street Mini-Warehouse Development Subdivision Site Plan Review
(S-1176-B), located at 301 Gill Street.
5. Flatline Engine Preliminary Plat (S-1403), located at 8400 Baseline Road.
6. Lot 2R Michael Cove Addition Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1404),
located on the southeast corner of Kanis Road and Michael Drive.
7. Pereira Revised Short-form PD-O (Z-3500-E), located at 212 North
McKinley Street.
8. Tanner Revised Short-form POD (Z-2850-B), located at 216 North
McKinley Street.
9. Hickory Grove Revised Long-form PD-R (Z-4562-C), located on the west
side of Hinson Road, south of Pebble Beach Drive.
10. Bowman and Kanis Retail Center Short-form PCD (Z-6544-A), located on
the northwest corner of Kanis Road and Bowman Road.
11. Highland Pointe Apartments Long-form PD-R (Z-6681-A), located north of
Cantrell Road at the end of Townsend Street.
12. Michael’s Revised Short-form PCD (Z-6863-C), located at
1701 Rebsamen Park Road.
13. Geyer Springs Church of Christ Conditional Use Permit (Z-7482), located
at 6004 West 53rd Street.
14. Lock and Load Business Center Short-form PCD (Z-7496), located on the
west side of Stagecoach Road in the 10,000 Block.
15. Mehaffy Short-form PD-O (Z-7497), located at 5401 Pinnacle Valley Road.
16. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-08-01) in the Central City Planning
District for 1858 South Chester Street a change from Single-family to
Mixed Use.
16.1. Featherstone Short-form PD-C (Z-7498), located at 1858 Chester Street.
17. Garcia Short-form PD-R (Z-7499), located at 17114 Devin Read Lane.
Agenda, Page Three
II. REGULAR AGENDA: (CONT.)
18. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-01-06) in the River Mountain
Planning District on the north side of Cantrell Road, east of Taylor Loop
Road a change from Transition to Commercial.
18.1. Rees Short-form PCD (Z-7500), located on the north side of Cantrell
Road, east of Taylor Loop Road.
19. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-11-04) in the I-430 Planning District
located at 3204 Old Shackleford Road from Mixed Office Commercial to
Mixed Commercial Industrial.
19.1. Ross Spark’s Office Development Short-form PCD (Z-5959-B), located at
3204 Old Shackleford Road.
20. Shear Madness Revised Short-form PD-C (Z-7327-A), located at
1911 West 2nd Street.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: S-1385
NAME: Callaghan Creek Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: North of Raines Road near the intersection with Sullivan Road
DEVELOPER:
M. Mellor Incorporated
10001 Mabelvale Pike
Mabelvale, AR 72103
ENGINEER:
The Mehlburger Firm
201 South Izard Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 38.8 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 22 FT. NEW STREET: 1850
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 17 – Crystal Valley
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A five (5) year deferral of Master Street Plan requirements to Raines Road (1/2
street construction requirement).
2. A waiver of Master Street Plan requirements for the internal streets (to maintain
internal streets as private streets).
3. A waiver of Master Street Plan requirements for the internal sidewalk placement and
to allow walking trails as an alternative pedestrian circulation system.
4. A variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 38 acre tract into 22 one-acre home
site, walking trails around a five acre lake and twelve acres of woodlands in a
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
2
private gated community. The development is requesting a waiver of Master
Street Plan requirements to allow the subdivision to develop with private streets
and walking trails as an alternative pedestrian circulation system.
The development is proposed as a fenced, private gated community with under
ground utilities and a private wastewater collection and treatment facility. The
applicant is proposing a Step System in which each unit will have a septic tank
where the solids are contained and the liquids are drained through lines to be
collected into a second holding tank to be treated and later be discharged into
the Callaghan Creek. (The site is located outside the city limits therefore
connection to the Little Rock Wastewater Utility system is not an option without
annexation.)
There are four waivers and variances being requested as a part of the
development. The applicant is requesting a waiver of Master Street Plan
requirements to Raines Road. The applicant is also requesting a waiver of the
Master Street Plan requirements for the internal streets. As stated the streets will
be maintained as private streets and will be constructed to City standard with the
exception of sidewalks. The applicant has indicted the desired effect is that of a
rural setting.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow three of the 22 lots to develop at a
greater lot depth to width ratio than is allowed under the Subdivision Ordinance
and a variance to allow lots to development without public street frontage (private
streets will serve the development).
The City’s Master Street Plan also indicates a Collector street located on the
applicant’s western property line. Staff has reviewed the Master Street Plan and
has determined due to the development pattern in the area a Collector in not
needed in this location. Staff is requesting the Commission review the
abandonment of the Collector street from the Master Street Plan as apart of this
application.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant; tree covered and gently sloping from the west and north to the
east and south. The area is primarily single family in both stick built and
manufactured homes. The area to the south is a non-conforming non-residential
uses at one time used as a salvage yard.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Southwest United for Progress, the Crystal Valley Neighborhood Association and
the Otter Creek Homeowners Association along with all abutting property owners
were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, staff has not received any
comment from area residents.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Raines Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required.
2. There is an un-named collector street shown on the Master Street Plan that
runs along the western boundary of the proposed subdivision. A dedication of
right-of-way 30-feet from the property boundary will be required.
3. Provide design of boundary streets conforming to the Master Street Plan.
Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
4. A sidewalk is required on one side of Lake Lucca Road to the intersection of
Lake Luccea Court.
5. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
6. Alteration of the water course will require approval from the Little Rock District
of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start of work.
7. The proposed alteration of the floodway will require flood map revisions.
Obtain conditional approval from Pulaski County and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency prior to start of construction.
8. This typical section does not meet Master Street Plan cross section
requirements. The typical residential section is 26-feet wide from back of
curb to back of curb.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside service boundary, no comment.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Installation of water facilities will be required in order to
provide adequate fire protection and water service to this property. All Central
Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service
must be met. 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.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
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: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 22, 2003)
Mr. Mike Watson of the Mehlburger Firm was present representing the
application. Staff briefly described the proposal indicating the site was located
outside the city limits but in the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. Staff
stated the applicant was proposing the placement of a private wastewater
collection and treatment facility on the site. Staff requested the applicant provide
additional information concerning the wastewater collection and treatment facility.
Staff stated there were a number of waivers and variances being requested for
the proposed development. Staff stated the applicant was requesting waivers for
Master Street Plan requirements and lot development standards. There was a
discussion concerning the proposed Collector street located on the western
property line to extend from Raines Road north to eventually connect with
Sullivan Road. There was also a discussion concerning the ordinance
requirements with regard to setbacks related to a collector street. Mr. Watson
stated with the development pattern in the area a Collector street was no longer
necessary. He stated the area to the west had developed with a cul-de-sac and
the rear of the homes would abut the street. He stated even if his owner
developed one-half of the street the other one-half would not be developed.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated right-of-way would be
required along Raines Road. Staff stated the Master Street Plan did require one-
half street improvements to the road and the waiver would have to be sought
from the Commission and ultimately the Board of Directors. Staff also stated per
the Master Street Plan a sidewalk was required along Lake Lucca Road to the
intersection of Lake Luccea Court.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
5
Mr. Watson stated he would meet with his client and discuss the comments. He
stated he would return a revised plan to staff by the requested date. 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 the issues raised at
the May 22, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has requested
a five (5) year deferral of half street construction to Raines Road. Staff is
supportive of this request.
The applicant has also requested a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to
allow Lots 12, 13 and 20 to develop with an increased depth to width ratio. The
Subdivision Ordinance states no lot maybe developed at a depth greater than
three times the width [Section 31-232(b)]. Staff is supportive of the request to
allow an increased depth to width ratio for these three lots (Lots 12, 13 and 20).
The applicant is also requesting the subdivision be developed with private
streets. Per the Subdivision Ordinance private streets shall be discouraged
however private streets maybe approved by the Planning Commission to serve
isolated development. The streets are to be constructed to public street
standards and are only permissible in the form of cul-de-sac and short loop
streets. The lots may develop on private street frontage if explicitly approved by
the Planning Commission. The applicant has indicated the streets will conform to
Master Street Plan design standard with the exception of the sidewalk
placement.
Three of the lots will abut Raines Road and the internal street. A variance to
allow these lots to develop as double frontage lots is not required. (Section 31-
232(d) double frontage lots are prohibited however reverse frontage lots are
permitted where a subdivision abuts or contains an existing or proposed arterial
street, freeway, expressway or railroad right-of-way.)
The proposed development will utilize a private wastewater collection and
treatment facility. The facility is proposed as a Step System utilizing individual
septic tanks to contain the solids while the liquids are pumped off. The liquids
are then collected to a centralized treatment facility where they are treated prior
to release in the Callahan Creek. The applicant will be required to work with the
State Health Department to obtain approvals of this type system.
There is a proposed Collector street shown on the City’s Master Street Plan
along the applicant’s western boundary. Staff has review the Master Street Plan
and has determined a collector street in this area is not necessary due to the
development patterns in the area. The area to the west has developed with the
rear of the homes abutting the proposed Collector street and the proposed
subdivision is to be developed with the rear of the homes abutting the proposed
collector street. Neither subdivision would take access to the street and both are
accessed by cul-de-sac streets. Staff will forward a Master Street Plan
amendment to the Board of Directors should the Commission approve the
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
6
removal of the Collector street from the Master Street Plan.
To Staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The request is consistent with development patterns in the
area and should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding area.
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 is supportive of the requested five (5) year deferral of Master Street Plan
requirements to Raines Road (1/2 street construction requirement).
Staff is supportive of the request waiver to allow the internal streets and to
maintain internal streets as private streets.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the paved walking trails to
serve as an alternative pedestrian circulation system.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow an increased lot depth to
width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20.
Staff recommends the Master Street Plan be amended to remove a proposed
collector street from the Master Street Plan adjacent to the western boundary of
the proposed development.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 12, 2003)
Mr. Mike Watson of the Mehlburger Firm was present representing the request. There
were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the
above report. Staff also presented positive recommendations of the waivers and
variances to the Subdivision and Master Street Plan Ordinances. Staff stated they were
supportive of the requested five (5) year deferral of Master Street Plan requirements to
Raines Road (1/2 street construction requirement) and the request to allow the internal
streets to be maintained as private streets. Staff stated the request for paved walking
trails to serve as an alternative pedestrian circulation system was also being supported.
Staff presented a positive recommendation of the Subdivision Ordinance variance
request to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20.
Staff stated the Master Street Plan included a proposed Collector Street along the
properties western boundary. Staff stated after a review of the Master Street Plan it
had been determined due to the development pattern in the area Staff was requesting
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
7
the proposed Collector Street be removed from the Master Street Plan. Staff stated if
the Commission agreed their recommendation would be forwarded to the Board of
Directors with the amendment request.
John Wallis spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his concerns
were with the discharge of the wastewater system into the creek. He stated his property
adjoined the site to the east and this was the low area of the site. He questioned how
the wastewater collection treatment system would be handled.
Mr. Gary Boyle raised questions concerning the proposed development. He stated he
was the fire chief in the area and he had not been contacted concerning the proposed
development. The Commission questioned why the volunteer fire department was not
contacted. Staff stated this was an oversight and they would work with the fire chief to
resolve his concern. Mr. Boyle stated he had a concern with the development only
allowing one entrance into the subdivision.
Ms. Cindy Nalley stated she also was concerned with the proposed development and
the discharge into the Callaghan Creek. She stated the area was a rural area and the
development of the site with 20 new homes was somewhat intense. She questioned
the requested waiver of street improvements stating Raines Road was a narrow two-
lane road. She stated with the development there would be additional traffic into the
area and the roadway should be widened to accommodate the increased traffic.
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, questioned if the Commission could hear the
item. She stated the Subdivision Ordinance clearly required the submission of approval
from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the wastewater collection and
treatment facility at the time of preliminary plat submittal. Ms. Dawson referred to
Section 31-400 stating the Commission could not vote on the plat until the applicant had
all the required documentation necessary.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed requirements and how
applications in the past had been handled. Staff stated in the past they had not
reviewed an application which would be utilizing a private wastewater collection and
treatment facility.
The applicant stated the Health Department required construction drawing prior to the
issuance of a letter stating a design would work in an area. Staff stated then a letter
stating they would not approve the concept would need to be furnished.
A motion was made to defer the item to the June 26, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion
carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 26, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the applicant was working with the
Arkansas Department of Health to resolve the outstanding wastewater issues related to
the plat. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the July 24,
2003 Public Hearing.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
8
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the Consent
Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
The applicant was not present representing the request. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the August 7,
2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated the request was not received as required by the
Planning Commission By-Laws and would require a waiver of the By-Laws to allow the
deferral.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws to allow the deferral of the request. The
motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent
agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 7, 2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested the application be deferred
to the September 4, 2003 Planning Commission agenda. Staff supported the deferral
request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent
Agenda for deferral to the September 4, 2003 agenda. A motion to that effect was
made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The item was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant had requested a deferral to the October 16, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated
the applicant was still trying to resolve issues with the Arkansas Department of Health
with regard to the wastewater collection and treatment facility. Staff stated they were in
favor of the deferral request.
Staff noted the request was the third deferral request and typically the By-Laws only
allowed for three deferrals. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the
By-Laws.
Staff also stated the applicant did not request the deferral until one day prior to the
Public Hearing. Staff noted the By-Laws stated all request should be made in writing at
least five day prior to the Commission meeting. Staff stated this too would require a
waiver of the By-Laws.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S- 1385
9
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws with regard to the third deferral request. The
motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws with regard to the time frame for the deferral
request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
A motion was made to defer the request to the October 16, 2003 Public Hearing. There
was no further discussion of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 30, 2003 Public
Hearing. Staff stated their recommendation was to defer the item to the December 4,
2003 Public Hearing to allow any additional information submitted by the applicant
concerning the wastewater collection and treatment system to be reviewed by the
Subdivision Committee.
Staff recommended if the issues related to the application were not resolved prior to the
December 4, 2003 Public Hearing the item be withdrawn and filed at a later date if and
when the outstanding issues were resolved.
Staff stated the deferral request would take a waiver of the By-Laws related to the
number of deferral request and the timeliness of the requested deferral. Separate
motions were made for each of the deferral request. Each motion carried by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: County Farm Rd. near River Valley Marina Rd.
Request: Single Family and Park / Open Space to Commercial
Source: David Henry, Hudson Enterprises Inc.
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
This application is a Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning
District from Single Family and Park / Open Space to Commercial. The
Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of
products, personal and professional services, and general business activities.
Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that
they serve.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is a marina currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately
10.52+ acres in size. The property to the north is rural property developed with
large lot Single Family residences and limited agricultural uses. All of the
surrounding property to the east, and west is vacant land or large lot residential
zoned R-2 Single Family. The Little Maumelle River borders the applicant’s
property on the south side. The land south of the river is zoned R-2 with a
railroad on the south bank.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On February 18, 2003 multiple changes were made from Transition and Low
Density Residential to Suburban Office, Single Family, Park/Open Space, Low
Density Residential, Office and Public Institutional along both sides of Cantrell
Road within a 1-mile radius south of the applicant’s property.
On July 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family to Park/Open Space
about 1 mile south of the application area at Pankey Park to recognize existing
conditions.
On April 20, 1999 multiple changes were made from Single Family and Low
Density Residential to Park / Open Space, Multifamily, Office, and Mixed Office
Commercial at Cantrell and Black Road about 2/3 of a mile southwest of the
applicant’s property to accommodate proposed development.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
2
The applicant’s property is shown as Single Family and Park / Open Space on
the Future Land Use Plan. All of the land to the north is shown as Single Family
while the land to the east, south, and west is shown as Park / Open Space along
the floodplain of the Little Maumelle River. The land south of the floodplain is
shown as Single Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
County Farm Road is a rural two-lane road shown as a Collector Street on the
Master Street Plan. River Valley Marina Road is a Local street with open
drainage providing access to the marina. River Valley Marina Road would need
improvements to be brought up to the Master Street Plan standards for
commercial streets for any non-residential development in the area covered by
this amendment.
A Class II Bikeway is shown on County Farm Road from Pinnacle Valley Road to
Isbel Lane. The Master Street Plan states that Class II Bikeways should be of
the same construction as the streets on which they are constructed. The
minimum width for a Class II Bikeway is 6 feet back from the curb. If roadway
shoulders are used for bikeways, the shoulder should be six feet wide. This
width should discourage vehicular traffic use and keep the path free of debris.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the
applicant’s property is located along the route of the “Take it to the Edge” Trail.
The “Take it to the Edge” Trail is part of the development concept of a three-trail
loop system around the city. This loop system of trails is intended to link parks,
open space, and recreation areas located along the edges of the city. The “Take
it to the Edge” trail is intended to provide an urban interface with the Arkansas
and Little Maumelle Rivers. The “Take to the Edge” Trail coincides with the
Class II Bikeway shown on the Master Street Plan.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
3
ANALYSIS:
The applicant’s property is located in a low-lying area on the north bank of the
Little Maumelle River outside city limits. The existing commercial uses at the
marina are isolated from other non-residential and non-agricultural uses by both
distance and topography. Any land shown as Commercial at this location would
not have any buffers to the west, north, or east from potential development of
less intense uses. The Little Maumelle River would provide the only buffer
between Commercial uses on the applicant’s property and the land located on
the south bank. A railroad runs parallel to the south bank of the Little Maumelle
River. South of the railroad the land slopes upward to the Walton Heights
subdivision. The railroad and slope may limit the amount of potential land
available for non-residential development on the south bank.
The applicant’s property is located near the “Take it to the Edge” trail. The trail is
situated to take advantage of the recreational opportunities provided by the river
and to provide public an interface with the river. Since the applicant’s property is
situated on the north bank of the Little Maumelle River, future development of the
property could also provide access to the river. If designed correctly, both the
trail and development of the applicant’s could complement each other. However,
the Commercial land use category is broad enough that non-residential
development of the applicant’s property could be incompatible with both the trail
and neighboring land uses. Any type of commercial development that could take
place in an area shown as Commercial should be developed in a way that would
complement the recreational amenities characteristic of the area. In addition,
utilities and other infrastructure would need to be improved to serve any changes
in Commercial uses located on the applicant’s property.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Pleasant Valley
Property Owners Association, River Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey
Community Improvement Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association,
Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, Secluded Hills Property Owners
Association, Walton Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association, Westbury
Neighborhood Association, and Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners
Association. Staff has not received any comments from area residents at this
time.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-01-03
4
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. A change to Commercial would
allow a broad range of uses that would be incompatible with neighboring land
uses and recreational amenities of the area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: June 12, 2003
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. The
Planning Commission did not discuss item 17. A motion was made to defer the
item to the July 24, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. The motion was
approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 recuse, and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: July 24, 2003
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the October 16, 2003
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wave the by-laws for a
five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion
was made and approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. A motion
was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: October 16, 2003
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the December 4,
2003 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier the by-laws
for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The
motion was made and approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. A
motion was made to wavier the by-laws for the maximum number of deferrals.
The motion was made and approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
NAME: River Harbor Long-form PCD
LOCATION: County Farm Road east of River Valley Marina Road
DEVELOPER:
101 River Harbor Limited Partnership
P.O. Box 21475
Little Rock, AR 72221
ENGINEER:
Hope Engineers
322 North Market Street
Benton, AR
AREA: 33 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 52 FT. NEW STREET: 2632
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Marina and Single-family (50 residential lots)
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes a two fold development on this 33 acre tract. The
proposal includes the subdivision of 22 acres into 50 single-family residential lots
and the redevelopment of an existing non-conforming commercial uses, River
Valley Marina, located on a 10 acre tract. The site is located within the City’s
Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction but not within the city limits of Little Rock.
The property is located on County Farm Road, south and east of its intersection
with River Valley Marina Road.
The plan is to extend a waterway from the Little Maumelle River and provide 47
of the 50 lots with a waterfront setting. The proposed development is intended to
provide quality residential development and utilize the recreational and scenic
attributes of the Little Maumelle and Arkansas Rivers, and the surrounding area.
The applicant has contact the US Army Corp of Engineers concerning the
extension of the Little Maumelle. A permit has been issued but the previous
permit does not match the existing development. The applicant is working with
the Corp to determine what additional review procedures will be required.
A portion of the proposed project lines in the floodway per the Floodway
Designation Map for Pulaski County. The applicant has indicated they will work
with the County and the Corp of Engineers to remove this area from the
floodway.
The applicant’s project lies outside the city limits and will not be allowed to
connect to the City of Little Rock’s wastewater collection system. The applicant
has indicated a private wastewater collection system. Each unit will have an
individual septic tank where solids are collected. The liquids will be piped to a
centralized location for further treatment before being released.
The applicant has indicated an essential component of the proposed plan is the
redevelopment of the River Valley Marina. The Marina has been in operation on
the site since the late 1960’s. When the City expanded the Extraterritorial
Planning Jurisdiction in the area the site became a non-conforming use. The
proposed plan includes the removal of the existing marina buildings and
complete redevelopment of the site, providing essentially the same commercial
area under roof, but in new structures on a reduced portion of the real property.
The applicant has indicated the existing docks along the Little Maumelle will
remain but will be rehabbed.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
3
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing marina with a bait shop, boat repair and outdoor
storage boats. Along the river are also boats docked in both covered and open
slips. The area of the proposed single-family is currently vacant, grass covered
and being used as a hayfield.
The Little Maumelle River adjoins the site to the south. The area to the east and
the west are currently vacant and also being used as hayfields. The area to the
north of the site is developed with single-family homes on five acre tracts
adjoining the Arkansas River.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Walton Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood Association and the River Valley
Property Owners 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 concerning the proposed
development.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. County Farm Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a Collector. A
dedication of right-of-way 30-feet form centerline will be required. The 50-feet
wide right-of-way widths for internal roads are acceptable.
2. Provide design of streets conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct 18-
foot half-street improvements to County Farm Road including 5-foot sidewalks
with planned development. Construct other street improvements as shown
(26-feet minimum width plus sidewalks).
3. This property is outside the corporate limits of Little Rock. Stormwater
detention and grading permits are not required.
4. Alteration of the water course will require approval from the Little Rock District
of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start of work.
5. Obtain a NDPES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
6. The proposed alteration of the floodway will require flood map revisions or a
no rise certificate. Obtain conditional approval from Pulaski County and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency prior to start of work.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
4
7. The minimum Finish Floor elevation above the 100 year flood elevation, as
established by Pulaski County, is required to be shown on the plat. (Note:
Maps indicate a base flood elevation of 264 feet or 12 foot above the typical
grade.)
8. Show the limits of the floodway on the proposed plat. Per FEMA regulations,
no fill or building construction is permitted in the floodway.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside service boundary. No connection maybe made to the existing
force main located in County Farm Road.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: SBC has some existing facilities that may need to be relocated or removed
for this construction project. Contact SBC at 373-5112 for additional details.
Central Arkansas Water: Water main extensions will be required in order to
provide fire protection and domestic service to this property. A Capital Investment
Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in
addition to normal charges. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. 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: Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Little Rock
Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family and Park/Open Space for this
property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for
a marina.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on
this agenda.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
5
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: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
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 where
commercial property is adjacent to residential to the south, east and west.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Register Landscape Architect.
Building Codes: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 22, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff briefly described the
proposal noting additional information was required to complete the review. Staff
requested a preliminary plat to encompass the entire ownership. Staff noted
front platted building lines and easements were the only requirement on the
preliminary plat.
Staff noted the comment from wastewater stating the development would be
required to install their own wastewater collection and treatment facility. The
applicant stated a consultant had been hired to design the system. The applicant
stated the system would include a septic system at each home with solids being
retained and the liquids being pumped to a centralized location for further
treatment before discharge.
Public Works comments were addressed. The applicant noted the streets would
be constructed to Master Street Plan requirement as requested. Staff also noted
the limits of the floodplain and the floodway. There was a general discussion
concerning the development and the requirements for developing in the
floodplain. Staff noted no development could take place in the floodway.
Staff questioned the material of the wall construction and the maintenance of the
wall. The applicant noted the wall would be constructed of wood and the
property owners association would be responsible for maintaining the wall.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
6
Staff questioned if the existing river development would remain. The applicant
stated the existing docks would remain but would be rehabbed.
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 at the May 22, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated a 30-foot platted building line along County Farm Road as required by
the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant has also indicated the linear feet of
internal street within the development. The applicant has stated the streets will
be developed to Master Street Plan standard and be dedicated as public streets.
The applicant has also indicated the areas of outdoor storage. The applicant has
indicated an area near the marina building to be used for overflow boat parking.
The applicant has indicated the current zoning of the single-family portion of the
site as zoned R-2, Single-family but the marina portion as zoned C-4. In the
General Note section the applicant has stated the zoning classification of the
single-family portion as an R-1 Zoning District. The C-4 zoning and the R-1
zoning are stated incorrectly. The entire site is zoned R-2, Single-family with the
marina being a non-conforming use. The proposed zoning classification is PCD
to allow the site to develop as a single-family subdivision and the marina to be
redeveloped.
The applicant has indicated the minimum lot size as 7,000 square feet with the
proposed average lot size being approximately 9,000 square feet. The proposed
lot sizes meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The
commercial lot proposed is also adequate to meet the minimum requirements for
a commercial lot. The remaining portion of the property is located across the
Little Maumelle River. There is currently no access to the site and there is no
access to the site proposed.
The proposed development is intended to allow water access to 47 of the 50
proposed lots. The Little Maumelle River will be dredged to create an
embayment. The applicant is proposing the retaining wall of the bulkhead to be
constructed of wooden pilings. The applicant has indicated the maintenance of
the bulkhead to be by a property owners association. Per the Zoning Ordinance
(Section 36-459) the applicant is to establish in the Bill of Assurance for the
proposed subdivision “… the ownership, operation, construction and
maintenance of private roads, parking areas, common usable open space,
community facilities, recreation areas, building, lighting, security measures and
similar common elements in a development.” Since a proposed Bill of Assurance
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
7
was not submitted to staff for review staff is unsure as to the provision for
maintenance of the retaining walls. Staff would recommend if the proposed
development is approved the applicant establish the Bill of Assurance and work
with the City Attorney’s office to ensure the legal form and effect prior to final
approval of the proposed development.
Per the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-460 the Commission should take into
consideration when reviewing a proposed development the compatibility between
the proposed development and surrounding areas so as to preserve and
enhance the neighborhood. In addition the Commission shall involve a
consideration of water conservation, preservation of natural site, amenities and
the protection of watercourses from erosion and siltation. The Residential
Densities shall be determined on the basis of the following considerations: The
densities of the surrounding development; The densities allowed under the
current zoning; The urban development goals and other policies of the
comprehensive plan, the topography and character of the natural environment,
and the impact of a given density on the specific site and adjacent properties.
Staff does not feel the proposed development meet these criteria.
Per Zoning Ordinance [Section 36-460(h)] “well designed open space is an
important factor in providing for innovative design and visual attractiveness.
Open space shall be evaluated utilizing the following general guidelines: (1) A
minimum of ten to fifteen percent of gross planned residential district areas shall
be designated as common usable open space. (2) Single-family, duplex, zero-
lot-line and townhouse development shall have a minimum of 500 square feet of
usable private open space per unit (3) No more than one-half of the common
usable open space may be covered by water.” Based on 22 acres of single-
family development the applicant would be required approximately 96,000 square
feet of open space. Although, a large portion of the area is designated as
common open space the development appears to indicated approximately 6000
square feet of open space in the form of a neighborhood park. The remainder of
the common open space is to be in the bulkhead, which the entirely may not be
considered as open space per the Zoning Ordinance.
The applicant has also indicated the floodway limits on the proposed site plan.
This information was received from Pulaski County Flood Boundary and
Floodway Map numbered 050179 0258, bearing an effective date of August 5,
1991. Per FEMA regulations, no fill or building construction is permitted in the
floodway. There is a process in which the limits of the floodway may be changed
and the applicant has indicated this process will be undertaken. Staff is not
comfortable with the approval of the proposed development without the
clearance from the Corp of Engineers for relocation of the floodway limits. Staff
would recommend the applicant secure the necessary approval from the Corp of
Engineers prior to the City of Little Rock approval of the proposed development.
To secure the necessary approval from the Corp of Engineers redesign of the
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
8
existing layout may be necessary. If this is the case the Commission is required
to re-evaluate the development based on a new layout.
The proposed development will also require alteration of watercourses. The
applicant has a previously approved 404 Permit, which does not match the
existing project. The permit authorized the continuing operation and
maintenance of an existing commercial marina. The authorization includes new
work, consisting of the dredging of, and the incidental redeposit of, dredged
material for a connection between the Little Maumelle River and a new
embayment being constructed for a 250-slip marina. The applicant has stated
they are working with the Corp of Engineers to determine if a major or minor
modification to the existing permit is required. Staff feels this is a key component
of the development. If the permit is not issued the development will not take
place. Staff feels the issues with the Corp of Engineers should be resolved prior
to approval by the City of Little Rock.
The applicant has indicated the development will be served by a private
wastewater collection and treatment facility. Per the Subdivision Ordinance
(Section 31-400) all subdivision shall be provided with a sewage collection and
treatment system approved by the wastewater utility and/or the state board of
health. The sewage collection system shall be designed to handle the
anticipated flow of sewage from within the subdivision, including development of
future sections of the same subdivision and adjacent areas within the same
drainage basin.
The subdivider shall either install the improvements referred to or whenever a
septic tank and absorption system or private water supply is to be provided,
require as a condition in the bill of assurance of the subdivision, that those
facilities shall be installed by the builder of the improvements of the lots in
accordance with Section 31-400 of the City of Little Rock Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant has not provided any details concerning the proposed wastewater
collection and treatment facility nor has the applicant provided staff with any
approvals from the Department of Health or the State Department of
Environmental Quality.
Staff has some great concerns with the proposed development. In staff’s opinion
the proposed development does not meet the intent of the Planned Zoning
District’s General Purpose. The Zoning Ordinance states a PUD is not granted
for the benefit of the applicant, but are used to establish developments that are
compatible with the surrounding area, are harmonious with the character of the
neighborhood, do not have a negative effect upon the future development of the
area, permit coordination of the planning of the land surrounding the PUD or PD
and create a desirable and stable environment.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
9
Staff feels the applicant is premature in the filing of the request. All necessary
approvals have not been obtained to allow the project to develop. There are
approvals needed from the Corp of Engineers concerning building construction in
a floodway, a permit to allow the dredging and creation of the embayment area
and approval of the Department of Health and the Department of Environmental
Quality for the wastewater collection and treatment facility.
The proposed request does not fit with the City of Little Rock’s Future Land Use
Plan. The Plan indicated the site as Park/Open Space and Single Family. There
is a request to amend the Land Use Plan to allow the marina portion of the site to
develop with a Commercial designation. Staff feels a Commercial designation in
this area does not fit. The area is predominately Single Family on the Plan.
Typically the Plan allows for buffers of less intense uses between Commercial
designations and Single Family. The Parks Plan indicates this area as a part of a
trail of parks connecting Two Rivers Park with other areas west of the city.
Further more staff feels the proposed development does not fit with the character
of the surrounding area. The area has developed with homes on large lots (5-
acre tracts). The proposed development would allow for one-quarter acre lots at
best.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed development as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 12, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were objectors present.
Commissioner Lowry stated he would have to recuse on the item due to a conflict of
interest. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated there
were a number of unresolved issues related to the development that warranted
approvals prior to the City approving the development.
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, stated she did not feel the Commission could
hear the item based on the Subdivision Ordinance requirement of Section 31-400 (b).
She stated the wastewater collection and treatment issue would have to be resolved
prior to approval.
Mr. David Henry representing the applicant stated he disagreed with the City Attorney’s
opinion. He stated the development was a community and this requirement did not
apply to the development. He stated the system would be subject to ADEQ (Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality) approval and not the City of Little Rock’s
approval. He stated the approvals could not be secured without the approval of the City
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
10
of Little Rock approving the preliminary plat first. He stated once the City approved the
request then the applicant would work with the Corp of Engineers, the County, FEMA
and the Health Department to resolve the outstanding issues.
Staff stated they did not agree with this request. Staff stated if the project was located
within the City a plat would not be approved because a portion of the development was
located in the floodway.
Mr. Rusty McMullan spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his
concerns were with the discharge of the affluent into the Little Maumelle River. He
stated if the area was flooded the affluent would then be forced into the backwaters of
the Little Maumelle River. He questioned at what point an environmental impact study
would be conducted on the site.
Mr. McMullan stated he was also concerned with the traffic the site would generate. He
stated with the development of 50 single-family lots there would be a significant
increase in the traffic on County Farm Road. He stated the roads in the area were not
equipment to handle such an increase in the amount of traffic.
Mr. Louis Bianco spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his
primary concern was that of the lack of city services such as wastewater collection and
fire protection. He stated there were two (2) subdivisions currently under construction in
the area both of which received all the necessary approval prior to the City approving
the preliminary plat.
Mr. Paul Cook spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated with the
current FEMA regulations the homes would be required to be constructed at a minimum
of 12-feet above the road. He stated this would look out of place in the area. He stated
currently the homes were constructed on five (5) acre tracts and the proposed
development was out of character.
Ms. Ruth Bell spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated if the City
had a check list and went down the list checking off all the things that the subdivision
met then few items that would be checked off.
There was a general discussion concerning if the Commission should be considering
the request. The were a general consensus the application should be deferred for six
(6) weeks to resolve as many outstanding issues associated with the proposed request
as possible.
A motion was made to defer the item to the July 24, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion
carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 ones, 1 absent and 1 recuse (Bob Lowry).
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 FILE NO.: Z-7412
11
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 24, 2003)
Mr. David Henry was present representing the request. There were objectors present.
Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 16, 2003
Public Hearing. Staff stated the request for the deferral was not received as required by
the Planning Commission By-Laws and would require a waiver of the By-Laws to allow
the deferral.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws to allow the deferral of the request. The
motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent
agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There was one registered objector present. Staff stated
the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the December 4, 2003 Public
Hearing. Staff noted the request was the third deferral request for the item. Staff
recommended if the issues related to the application were not resolved prior to the
December 4, 2003 Public Hearing the item be withdrawn and filed at a later date if and
when the outstanding issues were resolved.
Staff stated the deferral request would take a waiver of the By-Laws related to the
number of deferral request and the timeliness of the requested deferral. Separate
motions were made for each of the deferral request. Each motion carried by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: C
Name: Wimbledon Loop Gate
Location: Wimbledon Loop Road near its intersection
with Baseline Road on the north side of Otter
Creek subdivision.
Owner/Applicant: Otter Creek Homeowner’s Association
Request: To amend existing franchise ordinance
(#16,968) to allow installation of a self-closing
gate with a keypad to limit access to the area.
STAFF REVIEW:
1. History and Request
The Otter Creek Homeowner’s Association requested and was granted a franchise
by the Board of Directors in September 1995 to install a manual gate across
Wimbledon Loop near its intersection with Baseline Road to limit traffic during
designated nighttime hours. The request essentially emanated from a concern for
safety in the neighborhood. Other stipulations in the original franchise allowed
closing the gate from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., availability of a security guard during the
time the gate is closed, and provision of 24 hour, 7 days per week video monitoring
of the area.
The current request, in the form of an ordinance amendment, provides for replacing
the existing manual gate with a keypad-operated gate. A representative of the Otter
Creek Homeowner’s Association has stated the intent is to have the gate closed all
the time, operable only by those with access to the code for the keypad.
The original ordinance #16,968 that is proposed for amendment had a term of
five (5) years and was apparently never renewed.
2. Master Street Plan
Wimbledon Loop is designated as a collector. Baseline Road is a principal
arterial. Future plans for Wimbledon Loop are for it to continue, in a loop, west
and north to a new intersection with Baseline Road.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.)
2
3. Need for Right-of-Way on Adjacent Streets
(Not applicable.)
4. Development Potential
Currently, there are 401 existing houses in the Otter Creek neighborhood north of
the creek.
Proposed future residential units in the area include:
¾ a preliminary plat south and west of Ben Hogan Court that has a proposed
103 single family houses
¾ another 96 apartment units at the southeast corner of Wimbledon and
Baseline to appear before the planning Commission on 9-4-03
¾ an additional 7.85 acres of MF24 zoned property with a max of 188 units.
This indicates a potential for 788 residential dwelling units to be developed in the
area. Assuming traffic generation rates of 10 trips per day for single family
homes, and seven trips per day for apartment units, future traffic using the two
entrances to Otter Creek would be 7000 trips per day. This would exceed the
desirable service level volume of 5000 trips per day for collector streets as per
the Design Specifications of the Master Street Plan.
5. Neighborhood Land Use and Effect
On the Future Land Use Plan, the north side of Baseline at Wimbledon is shown
as Low Density Residential from Col. Carl Miller eastwards to almost Stagecoach
Road. The land is zoned MF6. There is a node for multifamily on Wimbledon at
both the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection with Baseline to
recognize the existing MF24 zoning. The surrounding area comprising the Otter
Creek residential area is shown as Single Family on the Land Use Plan and is
zoned R2.
6. Neighborhood Position
The property owners association made this request. No other comments have
been received from neighborhood groups as of this writing.
7. Effect on Public Services or Utilities
Fire Department – No objection if provided with a Knox-box brand access box at
the gate for fire access.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.)
3
Police Department – Has no objection to the gate provided that emergency
vehicles have the ability to freely enter the gates. All emergency agencies
should be provided a special access code.
8. Reversionary Rights
(Not applicable.)
9. Public Welfare and Safety Issues
Installation of the key pad gate is being proposed to increase security and reduce
crime. Presumably, only the present and future occupants and property owners
(788) will have access codes to the gate along with family members, service
workers, and emergency personnel.
Closure of the Baseline entrance to Otter Creek can be expected to increase
traffic on Otter Creek Boulevard.
Closure of this street with a keypad access gate can be expected to cause at
least some level of delay in gaining emergency access to the neighborhood for
police, fire and ambulance service.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
There has been some question in the past from the City Attorney’s office whether it
would be legal or appropriate to gate a public street. Staff believes closure would set an
undesirable precedent for the traveling public. In effect it will present an aspect of a
“gated private community” on a public right-of-way.
Wimbledon Loop is a designated collector, intended to serve a large traffic volume in
the area. A gate would cause emergency service and traffic delays for the current and
planned development in the area. Two points of open access is desirable to meet
demands. Staff does not support the request.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE August 14, 2003
Mike Hood presented the item to committee and gave a brief history of the gate and
described the current request. There was some discussion of the legality of the request
given the position the City Attorney took on a previous street closure request.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.)
4
Update:
Current Traffic Counts for Wimbledon Loop and Otter Creek Boulevard are as
follows:
Wimbledon Loop at Baseline
Southbound (in) 1415 vehicle per day
Northbound (out) 1734 vpd
Total 3149 vpd
Otter Creek at Stagecoach
Westbound (in) 2891 vehicle per day
Eastbound (out) 2716 vpd
Total 5607 vpd
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant had requested a deferral to the October 16, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated
the applicant was still trying to resolve issues with the Public Works Department. Staff
stated they were in favor of the deferral request.
Staff also stated the applicant did not request the deferral until one day prior to the
Public Hearing. Staff noted the By-Laws stated all request should be made in writing at
least five day prior to the Commission meeting. Staff stated this too would require a
waiver of the By-Laws.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws with regard to the time frame for the deferral
request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes. 0 noes and 1 absent.
A motion was made to defer the request to the October 16, 2003 Public Hearing. There
was no further discussion of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
On September 25, 2003, the applicant amended the application in part to address the
concerns of the City Attorney’s office regarding the restriction of public access to a
platted street. In addition, the applicant is now requests approval to place gates at both
the south entrance on Otter Creek Boulevard and on the north entrance on Wimbledon
Loop.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.)
5
The gates will allow unrestricted access to the public by opening for all vehicles. As a
vehicle approaches the gate, the gate will automatically open. Video cameras will
record the vehicle and license plate as it passes through the gate. To address concerns
about vehicle stacking up, gates will open automatically and stay open during peak
morning and afternoon traffic periods. In addition, gates will automatically open and
stay open in the event of a power failure. As with the original request, the north gate
on Wimbledon Loop will close and stay closed from 11pm to 6 am.
While this amended request address some of the legal concerns about public access
and traffic concerns, Staff believes closure would set an undesirable precedent for the
traveling public.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the December 4, 2003 Public
Hearing. Staff noted the request was the third deferral request for the item. Staff
recommended if the issues related to the application were not resolved prior to the
December 4, 2003 Public Hearing the item be withdrawn and filed at a later date if and
when the outstanding issues were resolved.
Staff stated the deferral request would take a waiver of the By-Laws related to the
number of deferral request and the timeliness of the requested deferral. Separate
motions were made for each of the deferral request. Each motion carried by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: S-1398
NAME: Culzean Estates Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: on the north side of David O Dodd, east of I-430
DEVELOPER:
Mystery Properties
16401 Chenal Valley Drive
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
McGetrick & McGetrick
319 President Clinton Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 40 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 123 FT. NEW STREET: 5800 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 12 – 65th Street West
CENSUS TRACT: 24.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance for the lot depth to width ratio requirement for Lots 17, 33, 59, 72 and
119.
2. A variance for the minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 61, 62 and 114.
3. A variance for the minimum lot area require for Lot 114.
4. A variance for the minimum lot width requirement for Lots 59, 73, 96 and 117.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this 40 acre site into 123 single-family lots.
The lots will average sixty-five by one hundred twenty feet or 7800 square feet in
area. The proposed subdivision will be developed in two phases with sixty lots in
Phase I and 64 lots in Phase II.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398
2
The applicant is proposing the placement of 5800 linear feet of new public street
to serve the proposed subdivision.
The proposed development will require variances from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow subdivision to develop in the manner proposed. The request
will require the following variances:
1. A variance for the lot depth to width ratio requirement for Lots 17, 33, 59, 72
and 119.
2. A variance for the minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 61, 62 and 114.
3. A variance for the minimum lot area require for Lot 114.
4. A variance for the minimum lot width requirement for Lots 59, 73, 96 and 117.
The applicant is also proposing the placement of a common recreational facility
within the development. The lake area along with two tot lots and a
neighborhood center are proposed as a Conditional Use Permit and is a separate
item on this agenda (File No. Z-7473 Item No. 15).
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site with a large lake located near the southern
boundary of the property. The applicant has indicated the existing lake will be
utilized in the proposed development as a recreational area and for detention.
There is a single-family subdivision located to the south of the site with new
homes being constructed on Sandy Lane. There are also single-family homes
located on David O Dodd Road south of the site. The area to the north of the site
is vacant tree covered as is the area to the east of the site. The area to the west
of the site if also vacant and tree covered with interstate I-430 located near the
site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property located within 200-feet of the proposed site along with the
John Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The minimum curve radius on Culzean View should be 150 foot.
2. The subdivision entrance on David O'Dodd should be redesigned to provide a
straight, north south, alignment with the existing traffic lanes.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398
3
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
4. Assuming Mystery Lake is to provide detention, the outlet works for the pond
must be designed to meet storm water detention ordinance requirements. An
emergency spillway must also be provided that will safely pass the 100-year
storm without damage to down stream property.
5. Easements are required for all storm water drainage areas.
6. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield).
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 Philpott) for more information regarding street light
requirements.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is
required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at
688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will
be required in order to provide service to this property. A Capital Investment
Charge based on the size of water main 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.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contac the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398
4
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 14, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff noted the
request was a preliminary plat to subdivide 40 acres into 124 single-family lots
and an area set aside as a private recreational facility. Staff stated the applicant
has also filed an application for a conditional use permit to allow the private
recreational facility.
Staff stated there were some concerns with buildability of a few of the lots
proposed. Staff stated the lots should be reviewed and if variances were
required on building setbacks the applicant should request these variances.
Staff also stated Lots 71, 72 and 111 would require a variance for the Lot Depth
to Width Ratio requirement.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Culzean View did not
meet the minimum curve radius of the Master Street Plan. Staff stated the
minimum radius should be 150-foot. Staff also stated a grading permit would be
required prior to start of construction. Staff questioned if Mystery Lake would be
used to provide detention. Staff stated if this were the case, a emergency
spillway must be provided that would safely pass the 100-year storm without
damage to downstream property.
Staff noted the comments from the various other departments and agencies.
Staff suggested the applicant contact them individually to obtain additional
information.
The applicant was instructed to provide the requested additional information to
staff no later than Wednesday August 20, 2003. 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 issues raised at the
August 14, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated
the minimum radius of Culzean View to be 150-feet as required by staff. The
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398
5
applicant has also requested several variances from the Subdivision Ordinance
to allow the subdivision to develop in the manner proposed.
The applicant has requested a variance for the lot depth to width ratio
requirement for Lots 17, 33, 59, 72 and 119. The ordinance requires no lot be
more than three times the depth of the width. The lots proposed do not meet this
minimum requirement, therefore require a variance. Staff is supportive of the
requested variance. The applicant has also requested a variance for the
minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 61, 62 and 114, a variance for the
minimum lot area requirement for Lot 114 and a variance for the minimum lot
width requirement for Lots 59, 73, 96 and 117. The ordinance requires lots have
a minimum lot depth of 100-feet, a minimum lot area of 7,000 square feet and a
minimum lot width of 60-feet. The proposed lots do not meet these minimum
requirements. Staff is supportive of the requested variances and feel if the lots
are developed as proposed the development should have minimal to no adverse
impact on the area.
The applicant has indicated a “Y” intersection with David O Dodd Road. Staff is
not supportive of this intersection configuration. Staff feels with the “Y”
intersection this will cause traffic conflicts and is not a good design for traffic
circulation and access management.
There are areas on the proposed preliminary plat which are unclear. The
applicant should clearly define the sidewalk location between lots 72 and 73 and
adjust the lot line accordingly. The applicant should also include the walkway
around the lake in Tract A and not on the backs of Lots 51, 52 53 and 69.
Staff also questions the buildability of Lots 82, 102 and 114. Staff requests the
applicant furnish a building footprint for each of these lots clearly defining the
setbacks on each of the lots.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the proposed addition should have minimal to no
adverse impact on the surrounding area.
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 approval of the following variances from the Subdivision
Ordinance for Culzean Estates Preliminary Plat:
1. A variance for the lot depth to width ratio requirement for Lots 17, 33, 59,
72 and 119.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398
6
2. A variance for the minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 61, 62 and 114.
3. A variance for the minimum lot area require for Lot 114.
4. A variance for the minimum lot width requirement for Lots 59, 73, 96 and
117.
• Staff recommends the applicant furnish the buildable area for Lots 82, 102
and 114.
• Staff recommends the applicant redesign the entrance from David O Dodd to
not intersect with a “Y” intersection.
• The walkway around the lake is to be included in Tract A and not on any of
the proposed lots.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated the applicant had requested additional time to work with Public
Works with regard to the “Y” intersection at David O Dodd. Staff stated they were
supportive of the request however, the request would take a waiver by the Commission
of the By-Laws since the request was not made as required by the Commission’s
By-Laws.
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws with regard to the time frame for the deferral
request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
A motion was made to defer the request to the September 18, 2003 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were objectors present.
Staff stated they were requesting the item be deferred to resolve some issues related to
the “Y” intersection at David O Dodd.
A motion was made to defer the request to the October 16, 2003 Public Hearing. There
was no further discussion of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were two registered
objectors present. Staff stated there were still issues related to right-of-way and
recommended the item be deferred to the December 4, 2003 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-7473
NAME: Culzean Estates Recreational Facility – Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION: North of David O Dodd and Shadybrook, east of I-430
OWNER/APPLICANT: Mystery Properties, Inc./Patrick McGetrick
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a
private recreational facility associated with a proposed
new single family residential subdivision (See S-1398,
Culzean Estates Preliminary Plat.)
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located north of David O Dodd and Shadybrook, east of I-430.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The overall area is somewhat rural in nature but is changing with the
recent approvals and development of new residential subdivisions.
Surrounding properties are zoned R-2 and are either undeveloped or
occupied by a variety of residential structures. This proposed recreation
area will be located within a proposed new residential subdivision and
should be compatible with uses in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet, all residents within 300 feet
who could be identified and the Stagecoach-Dodd and SWLR United for
Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The applicant proposes a 42 space parking lot accessed via a single
driveway off of proposed Culzean View. The number of parking spaces
will likely be reduced once required landscaping areas are provided. This
is a private recreational area serving only the residents of Culzean
Estates. The parking provided should be more than adequate to serve the
needs of the development.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
The plan submitted does not allow for the twenty (20) foot average buffer
width required along Culzean View Street. At no point should this buffer
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7473
2
drop below a width of ten (10) feet. Additionally, the plan fails to provide
the interior landscaping (1,555 square feet) required by the Landscape
Ordinance. Additionally, there is no provision for building landscaping.
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.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide
approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered
Landscape Architect.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: (From S-1398)
1. The minimum curve radius on Culzean View should be 150 feet.
2. The subdivision entrance on David O Dodd should be redesigned to
provide a straight, north south, alignment with the existing traffic lanes.
3. A grading permit in accordance with section 29-186(c) & (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site
grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved
prior to the start of construction.
4. Assuming Mystery Lake is to provide detention, the outlet works for the
pond must be designed to meet storm water detention ordinance
requirements. An emergency spillway must also be provided that will
safely pass the 100 year storm without damage to down stream
property.
5. Easements are required for all storm water drainage areas.
6. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to
start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the
right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick
Bergfield).
7. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as
required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic
Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information
regarding street light requirements.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7473
3
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
required in order to provide service to this property. A Capital
Investment Charge based on the size of water main 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.
Fire Department: Place a fire hydrant for club house.
County Planning: No Comments received.
CATA: No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 14, 2003)
This item was discussed partly in conjunction with Culzean Estates preliminary
plat, S-1398. Staff presented the item and noted additional information was
needed on the proposed clubhouse and pavilion; days and hours of operation;
site lighting; dumpster location; fencing and the tot lots. Staff asked if the
clubhouse/proshop would contain other facilities such as a restaurant or bar.
Public Works and landscape comments were discussed. It was noted that a
variance of the screening requirement on the north and west perimeters would be
appropriate since those perimeters abutted the rest of the Culzean Estates
development. Utility comments were noted.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues no later than Wednesday,
August 20, 2003. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has proposed the development of a new, single family residential
subdivision on 40± acres located north of David O Dodd, east of I-430 (see
Culzean Estates Preliminary Plat, S-1398). The subdivision consists of 124
residential lots located around a 7.62± acre recreation area. The private
recreation area contains a 6-acre lake with two fishing piers, paddle boats, a
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7473
4
miniature golf course, 2 pavilions, 2 tot lots (playgrounds), a club house, parking
lot and a walkway around the perimeter of the lake. The clubhouse will have a
kitchen facility but not a restaurant or bar. Sidewalks throughout the subdivision
will provide access to the tot lots, lake, walkway and other recreation facility
amenities. The facility’s hours of operation are proposed as 7 days a week, from
8:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. The area of the clubhouse, pavilions and golf course will
be lighted with a combination of low-level, pole-mounted lights and ground-level
lights. The tot lots will be fenced with decorative materials and a 7-foot tall wood
fence will be located along the south perimeter of the site. A single ground-
mounted sign will be located in front of the clubhouse, near the street. On
August 20, 2003, the applicant submitted responses to issues raised at
Subdivision Committee and noted in the preceding analysis.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit to allow the proposed
private recreation facility. The recreation area comprises 19% of the overall plat
and provides recreation facilities over and above those found in a typical
residential subdivision.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the approved site plan.
2. Compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,
5 and 6 of the staff report.
3. The private recreational use is to be operated only for the mutual
recreation of residents of the subdivision and their guests and not as a
business for profit.
4. Signage is to be limited to a single ground-mounted sign not to exceed 6
feet in height and 32 square feet in area.
Staff recommends approval of a variance to allow a 7-foot tall wood privacy fence
along the south perimeter of the site subject to the fence being constructed with
the finished side facing outward.
Staff recommends approval of a waiver of the screening requirement on the
northern and western perimeters of the recreational area since it is abutting lots
within the Culzean Estates Subdivision.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7473
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4, 2003)
Patrick McGetrick was present representing the application. Staff informed the
Commission that the applicant had requested a deferral to allow time to address
unresolved issues related to the proposed access point onto David O Dodd.
There was no further discussion.
A motion was made to waive the bylaws and accept the late request for deferral.
The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
A motion was made to defer the item to the September 18, 2003 meeting. The
motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 2003)
The applicant was present. There were several persons present registered in
opposition. Staff informed the Commission that the issue of access to David O
Dodd associated with the preliminary plat had not been resolved and the item
needed to be deferred. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the October 16,
2003 Commission meeting. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was present. There were other interested parties present. Staff
informed the Commission that the issue of access associated with the
preliminary plat had not been resolved and the item needed to be deferred.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 4,
2003 Commission meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: S-1400
NAME: Watershed Project Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Springer Boulevard, south of I-440
DEVELOPER:
Watershed
3701 Springer Boulevard
Little Rock, AR 72201
ENGINEER:
McGetrick & McGetrick
319 President Clinton Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 9.67 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 24 – Sweet Home
CENSUS TRACT: 40.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Fence height variance adjacent to Springer
Boulevard.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the construction of 52 units of multi-family housing on the
site. The development will be geared toward low income renters. The applicant
proposes the placement of two and three bedroom units on the site. There are
26 two bedroom units and 26 three bedroom units on the site; two of each
bedroom mix is proposed as fully accessible.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400
2
The applicant is proposing the maximum building height of 33.5 feet. The
applicant has also indicated a single development sign located near the northern
driveway. The applicant has indicated the sign will be consistent with signage
allowed in multi-family zones.
The applicant proposes the placement of 121 parking spaces on site to serve the
development. The applicant has indicated the parking ratio as 2.24 spaces per
unit.
The applicant is proposing the placement of a brick and steel fence around the
development. The fence is proposed at six feet in height. The applicant is
requesting a variance to allow an increased fence height in the building setback.
The site is located in the 100 year floodplain and the limits of the floodway extend
through the project area. The applicant is currently working with FEMA to re-map
the area and remove the area from the designated floodway.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant site with trees located around the perimeter of the site.
There is a small strip retail center located on the southeastern portion of the site.
The southern boundary of the site is a Union Pacific Railroad line.
Watershed is located east of the site across Springer Boulevard. The area to the
west of the site is vacant and is the Fourche Creek floodway.
There are three bill boards located on the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property located within 200-feet of the proposed site along with the
Granite Mountain Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. All of this land lies within the mapped floodway of Fourche Creek. Staff does
not believe it is appropriate to approve the proposed project until a conditional
letter of flood map revision is obtained from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. If the letter is obtained, the entire site will have to be
raised above the 100-year floodplain elevation.
2. Springer / Confederate Boulevard is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial. A minimum dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline
will be required.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400
3
3. With the planned development, provide design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street
including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development.
4. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section
8-283 prior to any filling, grading, land clearing or construction.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield).
6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The criteria for an arterial is 300
feet center to center and 150 feet from property line. The width of driveway
must not exceed 36 feet.
8. Alteration of the water course and wetlands clearance will require approval
from the Little Rock District of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start
of work.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, Capacity Contribution Analysis required. Contact
the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Additional interior easements will be required for electrical distribution
(underground). The exact location cannot be determined at this time.
Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Additional fire hydrant(s)
and/or on site fire protection may be 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 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: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400
4
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: At least two additional landscape islands are required within the
interior of the proposed long parking lot to help break up the sea of asphalt.
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
adjacent residential properties.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide approved
landscape plans stamped with seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 14, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff briefly described
the proposed development indicating the area was located in a designated
floodway. Staff stated customarily the city did not approve developments located
in the floodway and stated staff’s recommendation would be that the
development not be reviewed until the floodway issue had been resolved.
Staff stated should the floodway issues be resolved, there were additional items
needed on the proposed site plan to complete the review. Staff requested the
applicant provide the rear building setback dimension. Staff also questioned if
one dumpster facility was sufficient to meet the needs of the development. Staff
stated the details of the proposed signage should be included on the proposed
site plan.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated if the area was
successfully removed from the designated floodway the entire area would be
required to be raised to above the 100-year floodplain elevation. Staff also
stated the proposed driveways did not meet the minimum criteria for driveway
spacing. Staff noted there were several agencies, which would require approval
of the proposed development prior to construction.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the interior islands did not
appear to meet the minimum ordinance requirement. Staff stated at least two
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400
5
additional islands would be required within the interior of the proposed parking lot
to help break up the sea of asphalt. Staff also stated a six foot high opaque
screen, either a wooden fence or dense evergreen plantings would be required
along the sides which abut residentially zoned properties.
Staff instructed the applicant submit a revised plan to staff addressing the
comments which could be addressed at this time. Staff also stated their
recommendation would be that the Commission not review the proposed
development until after the applicant had secured a conditional approval from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 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 on August 20, 2003 addressing
most of the issues raised at the August 14, 2003 Subdivision Committee
Meeting. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height of 33.5 feet
and the applicant has noted the rear building setback dimension from the
proposed fence. The site is a large tract extending to the west. The proposed
building setbacks are more than adequate to meet the minimum building setback
requirement.
The applicant has indicated the development will be surrounded in a brick and
iron fence. The site is a cleared site and has no natural screening in place. The
applicant is requesting a waiver of the required land use buffer required
screening. The applicant has indicated the site is located adjacent to a one
hundred foot railroad right-of-way on the south and a floodway on the north and
west. The applicant has also indicated security as a concern and the screening
would not allow for policing of the site. Staff feels this request is reasonable and
recommends approval of the requested waiver of the screening requirement.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow an increased fence height
adjacent to Springer Boulevard. The fence proposed is six-feet and the
maximum fence height allowed within the setback is four feet. Staff is supportive
of the proposed request. The proposed fencing is for uniformity around the
development. The proposed fence is a see through fence, which will allow for
the passage of light and air into the development. The applicant has not
indicated the development will be gated.
The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign near the northern
driveway. The applicant has indicated the proposed signage will comply with
signage allowed in multi-family zones or six feet in height and twenty-four square
feet in sign area. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage.
The applicant is requesting a variance for the driveway locations. Typically the
ordinance requires drives to be placed at least 150-feet from the property line
and 300-feet center to center. The applicant has indicated the southern drive will
be placed 55-feet from the property line which is located adjacent to a 100-foot
railroad right-of-way. The northern drive is located 170-feet from the northern
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400
6
property line. The applicant has indicated the 300-foot center to center
requirement. Staff is not supportive of the proposed driveway configuration.
Staff feels the applicant should maintain the northern driveway and allow the
southern drive to be an emergency access only into the site. Staff has safety
concerns by allowing the drive to be located within 55-feet of the proposed
intersection of the railroad and Springer Boulevard.
The site is zoned C-3 which allows multi-family development at a density of R-5.
This typically requires a lot area per family of 1,200 square feet per dwelling unit.
The proposed development is more than adequate to meet the requirement.
The proposed development is located within a designated floodway. The
applicant is working with FEMA to resolve the floodway issue and have the area
“re-mapped” to remove the floodway designation from this site. Staff feels the
proposed development should not be reviewed until the applicant has resolved
the floodway issues. The city is not allowed to issue permits for projects located
in the floodway and staff feels the development should not be given approval for
development with the site being located in a designated as a floodway.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the proposed development not be reviewed at this time. Staff
recommends the applicant resolve the issue of the floodway with FEMA prior to
receiving approval from the Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4, 2003)
The applicant was present. There were objectors present. Chairman Nunnley stated
the Commission’s policy had been to allow the applicant a deferral when fewer than
nine Commissioners were present. He stated eight Commissioners were remaining and
questioned if the applicant desire a deferral.
Mr. Pat McGetrick requested the deferral to the September 18, 2003 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made and approved to defer
the item to the September 18, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of
8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 2003)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff stated the applicant
was requesting a deferral to allow additional time to resolve some issues related to the
floodway. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the By-Laws since the
request was not made in accordance with the requirements set by the Commission’s
By-Laws.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400
7
A motion was made to waive the By-Laws for the deferral request. The motion carried
by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made and approved to defer
the item to the October 16, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of
10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the issue related to the floodway had not been resolved
and staff stated typically the Commission did not hear or approve applications located in
the floodway.
Mr. McGetrick stated the applicant had received a verbal approval from the Corp of
Engineers and anticipated receiving a letter of confirmation in the next two to three
weeks. Staff stated with the uncertainty of the receipt of the approval letter from the
Corp of Engineers and Staff’s desire to take the additional information back to the
Subdivision Committee they would request the item be deferred to the December 4,
2003 public hearing. Mr. McGetrick indicated he was agreeable to the December 4,
2003 deferral.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-867-CCCCC
NAME: The Reserve at Chenal Valley Apartments Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Tract 75A, Chenal Valley Subdivision, south of Rahling Road
DEVELOPER:
The Reserve at Chenal Valley Apartments, LLC
7570 Madison Road
Madison, MS 39110
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223-9187
AREA: 16.78 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: MF-18, Multi-family 18 units per acre
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. Reduced building setback on the east and south property lines.
2. A variance to allow the clearing of the required land use buffer along the east
property line.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the construction of 19-buildings containing 248 units of
multi-family housing on this 16.78-acre site. The proposal includes the buildings
to be two and three story with a maximum building height of 35-feet. There will
be 72-1 bedroom units, 120-2 bedroom units and 56-3 bedroom units. All the
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-CCCCC
2
units will have 9-foot ceilings and ceramic tile entryways and kitchen flooring.
Exterior construction will be of frame structure with hardi-plank and brick exterior.
The proposed density of the development is 14.77 units per acre.
Each building will be constructed around outdoor landscaped common areas,
concentrating on easy access to outside amenities and parking. Common area
amenities include volleyball court, lighted tennis court, swimming pool with
decorative fountains and accent lighting, abundantly landscaped outside cabana
with fireplace and Jacuzzi, fitness center, 24-hour business center, indoor
children’s play room, walking natural trail limited access gate system and
clubhouse.
The applicant is requesting a reduced setback along the east and south property
line for the proposed development.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant wooded site sloping from north to south. The area to the
east is zoned C-1 and O-3 and is also vacant. Champlin Drive has been
constructed a short distance and the area zoned MF-18 has developed as the
Carrington Park Apartments. The area to the west is also vacant and zoned O-2.
Further west of the site is The Villages at Chenal Planned Commercial
Development. The area to the north is wooded and vacant, zoned for non-
residential uses.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Chenal Ridge Property Owners Association was notified of the Public Hearing
along with all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
2. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required
by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at
(501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light
requirements.
3. Driveway width does not meet the access and circulation requirements of
Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet.
The location of the driveway across from a collector street that may someday
meet signal warrants is also a concern. A meeting with Public Works staff is
suggested.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-CCCCC
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Capacity contribution
analysis required. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional
information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based
on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered
connections off the private fire system. The facilities on-site will be private. When
meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central
Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be
inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of
Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. The Little Rock Fire Department
needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire
hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be
installed at the Developer's expense. 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: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: The required full average width of the eastern land use buffers
abutting single family residential properties is 48 feet. An average of 70% (33.6
feet) of this buffer is required to remain undisturbed. The plan submitted does
not fulfill this requirement.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-CCCCC
4
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
eastern perimeter abutting single-family properties.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees
as feasible on this tree-covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling landscaping,
requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper
or larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed development indicating the request was for a
subdivision site plan review. Staff noted there were areas in which the required
building setbacks and buffers were not being met. Staff also stated all buildings
should be separated by a minimum of 10-feet. Staff requested the applicant
include the bedroom mix in the general notes section of the site plan.
There was a general discussion concerning the trash compactor and the
indicated location. Staff noted persons living near the front of the complex would
have to travel a great distance to deposit their garbage. Staff suggested the
applicant consider placing two trash collection locations on the site.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated there were concerns with
the location of the driveway. Staff requested the applicant meet with staff
independently to determine the most desirable location for the driveway.
Landscaping comments were addressed. It was determined only a small portion
of the eastern perimeter would require buffering. Staff noted the zoning along
the western perimeter was zoned O-2 which would not require buffering by this
development. Staff noted the screening requirements and the requirement of an
irrigation system to water landscaped area.
Staff noted the development did not have any emergency exit. Mr. White stated
the driveway was split and the Fire Department had been allowing this
arrangement as the secondary entrance.
Staff noted comments from the Fire Department, Central Arkansas Water and the
Little Rock Wastewater department. Mr. White stated he would contact these
agencies individually for further clarification.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-CCCCC
5
There was no further discussion of the item; the Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
dimensioned all building setbacks, provided details of proposed signage and
fencing. The applicant has indicated signage will comply with signage allowed in
multi-family zones or a maximum of six feet in height and twenty-four square feet
in sign area. The applicant has also indicated fencing will be vertical picket
square steel tube with horizontal runners. The proposed fence will be a
maximum of six feet in height. There are two locations in which the building
does not meet the required building setback. In one location along the eastern
property line the proposed building setback is 34.95 feet and along the south
property line the maintenance building is proposed at 27-feet. Staff feels these
setbacks are acceptable. The proposed building height is 35-feet on the
apartment buildings and the maintenance building is proposed as a single-story
building.
The applicant has met with Public Works staff concerning the driveway location.
Staff is agreeable to the driveway location but is requesting the applicant design
the driveway to match the street design across Rahling Road. There is sufficient
area for the drive to be designed as development becomes more immediate.
The applicant is proposing the development to be a gated community. There are
two sets of gates on the site. The gates will be designed with a center isle
allowing the entering and exiting traffic to be separated. The drive lanes are
proposed at 23-feet and the divided arrangement is acceptable to the Fire
Department by allowing access to the development if a car were stalled in the
drive lane.
The proposed site plan indicated 492 parking spaces. The typical minimum
parking requirement for a multi-family development would be one and one-half
spaces per unit. The development includes 248 units resulting in a typical
minimum-parking requirement of 372 spaces. The proposed parking is more
than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand.
The applicant has proposed a trash compactor on the site. There is only one
location for collection proposed. The applicant has indicated the compactor will
be placed in a well and a solid brick fence installed above grade for safety.
The applicant is requesting a reduced land use buffer along the eastern
perimeter where the site abuts single-family zoned property. The required buffer
in this area of 33.6 feet is to remain undisturbed. The applicant has requested a
variance to allow the buffer area to be disturbed and to eliminate the required
buffer in this area. The required buffer in this area is adjacent to the R-2 zoned
property. Staff feels although zoned residentially it is very unlikely the area will
develop as residential. Staff is supportive of the request to eliminate the land use
buffer in this area.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-CCCCC
6
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The proposed development is zoned MF-18 and the
proposed density is 14.77 units per acres. Staff feels the proposed development
should have minimal to no adverse impact on the surrounding area if constructed
as proposed.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced setback
along the east and south property line.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the clearing of the
required land use buffer along the eastern perimeter.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
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 request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and
F of the above report.
Staff also recommended approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced setback
along the east and south property line.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow the
clearing of the required land use buffer along the eastern perimeter.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1042-DD
NAME: The Villages at Wellington Phase XI – B Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: on the northwest corner of Wellington Village Road and Wellington
Plantation Drive
DEVELOPER:
Winrock Development Company
2222 Cottondale Lane
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 25.7 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 57 FT. NEW STREET: 4070 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. Reduced platted building line along Wellington Village Road.
2. A variance to allow Bristol Lane to be constructed to minor residential street
standard.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing the development of this 25.7-acre tract with 57 single-
family homes. The applicant is proposing an average lot size of 85-feet by 130-
feet or 11,050 square feet. The development will be served by the extension of
Wellington Village Road and Wellington Plantation Lane currently under
development in Phase 9B. The applicant is proposing the construction of 4,070
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-DD
2
linear feet of new street. Bristol Lane will be constructed to Minor Residential
Standards; without sidewalks. The remainder of the streets will have sidewalks
placed as required by the Master Street Plan.
The applicant has indicated an open space tract containing 2.28 acres as a part
of the development. This proposed development is similar in nature to the
existing Villages of Wellington development and the residents will have access to
the existing recreational facilities within the subdivision. The applicant is
proposing a density of 2.2 units per acre.
The applicant has filed two preliminary plats for the same property. See Item #3
– File No. S-1042-EE for the alternative proposal.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant wooded site located north and west of the area being
developed by the applicant as The Villages of Wellington Subdivision. There are
no roads existing in the area, only trails. The site is zoned R-2, single-family as
is the area to the east and north. The area to the west of the site is developed as
the Carrington Park Apartments and the area south of the site is zoned R-3,
single-family and is currently vacant.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Chenal Ridge and the St. Charles Property Owners Associations along with all
owners of property abutting the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The Master Street Plan requires sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps
along the first two lots on Bristol Lane and on the remainder of Waterford
Lane. The minimum curve radius on Bristol Lane is 75 feet.
2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
4. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade
permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering
at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-DD
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easement, 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: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based
on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered
connections off the private fire system. A water main extension including off site
improvements will be required in order to provide service to this property. 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. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Doug McNeil were present representing the request. Staff
stated the applicant had filed two preliminary plats for the same property. Staff
stated this would allow the developer options when the actual development
began. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted sidewalks were
required along Bristol Lane on the first two lots. Mr. White stated he was
requesting Bristol Lane be classified as a minor residential street. Staff stated
the criteria to be classified, as a minor residential street was no more than 35 lots
and 750 linear feet. Staff stated Bristol Lane met the criteria. Staff questioned if
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-DD
4
Waterford Lane would meet the length criteria when the street was extended to
the north. Mr. White stated that the developer first proposed a cul-de-sac but the
developer was being a good neighbor and allowing the street to be extended to
the north to access the adjoining property. Mr. White stated property had access
to Rahling Road but the terrain was too steep to allow a desirable access. Staff
suggested a deferral rather than a waiver of sidewalks would be more preferable.
The proposed Open Space tract was discussed at length. Staff questioned who
would be responsible for maintenance of the open space. Mr. McNeil stated the
Property Owners Association would be responsible for maintenance of this area
as well as the other designated open space areas. Staff stated the tract would
be required to have access for maintenance and fire protection. Mr. White stated
he would indicate access to the open space area on the revised plan.
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 preliminary plat to staff addressing the issues
raised at the September 25, 2003, Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has requested a variance to allow a reduced platted building line along
Wellington Village Road. The ordinance requires a 30-foot platted building line
adjacent to a collector street. The applicant is proposing the placement of a 25-
foot platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested reduced building
line. The area to the east has been preliminary platted with a similar building line
and staff feels continuity will add to the overall development.
The applicant is requesting a variance from the Master Street Plan to allow
Bristol Lane to be constructed to minor residential street standard. Staff is
supportive of this request. The applicant has indicated the street will be
approximately 820 feet in length and end in a cul-de-sac. The applicant has also
requested Waterford Lane be constructed to minor residential street standard.
The proposed street length meets the minimum criteria.
The applicant is proposing the subdivision of this 25-acre tract into 57 single-
family lots. The lots will average 85-feet by 130-feet or 11,050 square feet. The
applicant has indicated 4070 linear feet of new street will be constructed with the
development. The proposed plat indicates the development will be constructed
in one phase.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The proposed development will be constructed at 2.22 units
per acre. Staff feels the proposed subdivision should have minimal to no
adverse impact on the surrounding area.
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.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-DD
5
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances to allow a reduced platted
building line along Wellington Village Road and to allow Bristol Lane to be
constructed to Minor Residential Street Standard.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. 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.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variances to allow
a reduced platted building line along Wellington Village Road and to allow Bristol Lane
to be constructed to minor residential street standard.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1042-EE
NAME: The Villages of Wellington Phase XI – A Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: on the northwest corner of Wellington Village Road and Wellington
Plantation Drive
DEVELOPER:
Winrock Development Company
2222 Cottondale Lane
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 25.7 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 72 FT. NEW STREET: 3930 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance to allow a reduced front yard platted building line of twenty (20) feet -
Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19 Block 20.
2. A variance to allow a reduced side yard setbacks to five (5) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19
and Lots 1-19 Block 20.
3. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setbacks of twenty (20) feet - Lots 2-26
Block 19 and Lots 1-19 Block 20.
4. A variance to allow a reduced platted building line along Wellington Village Road.
5. A variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 10-13, 15 – 17 and
25 – 26 of Block 19.
6. A variance to allow Bristol Court to be classified as a Minor Residential Street.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-EE
2
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing the construction of 73 single-family homes on this
25.7-acre parcel. The applicant is proposing 54 of the lots to be developed as
garden style patio homes with reduced front, side and rear yard setbacks while
the remaining 19 lots will be developed without any reduced setbacks. The
average lot sizes proposed are 60-feet by 120-feet and 85-feet by 130-feet.
There will be 3930 linear feet of new street constructed as a part of the
development. The applicant is proposing a density of 2.8 units per acre.
The applicant is requesting a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance; to allow
the development to include reduced front, rear and side yard setbacks. The
applicant has requested a variance to allow Lots 2 – 26 of Block 19 and 1 – 19 of
Block 20 to have a reduced front yard building line of 20-feet and a reduced rear
yard setback of 20-feet. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow Lots
10-13, 15-17, 25-26 Block 19 to have an increased lot depth to width ratio. The
applicant is requesting a variance to allow reduced side yard setbacks for the
Garden Style Homes located on Bristol Court (Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19
Block 20) of 5-feet. The request also includes the classification of Bristol Court
as a minor residential street.
Located in the northern portion of the development the applicant has indicated a
2.18-acre tract of open space.
The applicant has filed two preliminary plats for the same property. See Item #2
– File No. S-1042-DD for the alternative proposal.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant wooded site located north and west of the area being
developed by the applicant as The Villages of Wellington Subdivision. There are
no roads existing in the area, only trails. The site is zoned R-2, single-family as
is the area to the east and north. The area to the west of the site is developed as
the Carrington Park Apartments and the area south of the site is zoned R-3,
single-family and is currently vacant.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Chenal Ridge and the St. Charles Property Owners Associations along with all
owners of property abutting the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The Master Street Plan requires sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps
on Bristol Court and Wellington Plantation Lane. The minimum curve radius
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-EE
3
should be 150 feet.
2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
4. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required
by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at
(501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light
requirements.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easement, 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: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition
to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any
metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension including
off site improvements will be required in order to provide service to this property.
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. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-EE
4
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Doug McNeil were present representing the request. Staff
stated the applicant had filed two preliminary plats for the same property. Staff
stated this would allow the developer options when the actual development
began. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the requested
variances related to the proposed preliminary plat. Staff stated the developer
was proposing the development with garden style patio homes and was
requesting reduced setbacks on all property lines. Staff requested the developer
indicate a consistent 25-foot platted building line along Wellington Village Road.
Staff stated this would still require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the storm water detention
ordinance applied to the property. Staff also noted a grading permit would be
required prior to any development. Staff stated the minimum curve radius should
be 150-feet. Staff also noted sidewalks would be required per the Master Street
Plan along Bristol Court and Wellington Plantation Lane. Mr. White stated he
was requesting Bristol Court be classified as a minor residential street.
Staff indicated the applicant should indicate access to the open space through an
access easement or a tract. Mr. White stated he would provide access to the
tract by extending an access from the tract to the roadway.
Staff noted comments from the other various agencies indicating Mr. White
should contact them individually if there were any questions. There was no
further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the
full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing the issues raised at
the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is
requesting Bristol Court be classified as a minor residential street. Staff is
supportive of this request.
The applicant is proposing the development of this 25-acre tract with 73 single-
family lots. The proposal includes the development of 3930 linear feet of new
street upon completion of the subdivision. The applicant is proposing the
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-EE
5
average lot size to be 60-foot by 120-foot for the Garden Style homes and
85-foot by 130-foot for the remainder of the lots. The proposed lots meet the
minimum lot size requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant is proposing the lots abutting Bristol Court be rear loaded with a no
vehicle access easement located along Bristol Court. Staff is supportive of this
arrangement. Staff would also recommend Lot 27 Block 19 and Lots 1 and 19
Block 20 not be allowed access to Wellington Village Road.
The applicant has indicated four (4) tracts of open space. The applicant has also
indicated a 30-foot stem to Wellington Plantation Lane to access Tract A, a 2.18
acre tract of Open Space. The other three tracts are located along Wellington
Village Road.
The applicant has requested reduced side yard and rear yard setbacks for the
development to develop as a garden style housing development. The applicant
is proposing the development of the lots in Blocks 19 and 20 with a 20-foot rear
yard setback, a 5-foot side yard setback and a 20-foot front platted building line.
The applicant is also requesting a 15-foot platted building line for Lots 62 – 70
Block 15. The lots in the area maintain an average slope of 18 percent. For lots
being developed under the hillside development standards a 15-foot platted
building line is allowable. The ordinance also requires a minimum of 10,000
square feet of lot area. The proposed lots meet this minimum requirement. Staff
is supportive of the request to reduce the building line in this area due to the
excessive slopes.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The proposed development will be constructed at 3.57 units
per acres. Staff feels the proposed subdivision should have minimal to no
adverse impact on the surrounding area.
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 approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced front
yard platted building line of twenty (20) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19
Block 20.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced side
yard setback of five (5) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19 Block 20.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced rear
yard setback of twenty (20) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19 Block 20.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced platted
building line of 25-feet along Wellington Village Road for Lots 8 – 11 Block 18,
Lots 1, 27 – 30 Block 19 and Lots 1 and 19 Block 20.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-EE
6
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced front
platted building line for Lots 62 – 70 Block 15.
Staff recommends Lot 27 Block 19 and Lots 1 and 19 Block 20 place a no vehicle
access easement adjacent to Wellington Village Road.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow an increased lot
depth to width ratio for Lots 10-13, 15 – 17 and 25 – 26 of Block 19.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow Bristol Court to be
constructed as a minor residential street.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. 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.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a
reduced front yard platted building line of twenty (20) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots
1-19 Block 20, a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a
reduced side yard setback of five (5) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19 Block 20, a
recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced rear yard
setback of twenty (20) feet - Lots 2-26 Block 19 and Lots 1-19 Block 20, a
recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced platted
building line of 25-feet along Wellington Village Road for Lots 8 – 11 Block 18, Lots 1,
27 – 30 Block 19 and Lots 1 and 19 Block 20, a recommendation of approval of the
requested variance to allow a reduced front platted building line for Lots 62 – 70 Block
15, a recommendation that Lot 27 Block 19 and Lots 1 and 19 Block 20 place a no
vehicle access easement adjacent to Wellington Village Road and a recommendation of
approval of the requested variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots
10-13, 15 – 17 and 25 – 26 of Block 19.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the request to allow Bristol Court
to be constructed as a minor residential street.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1176-B
NAME: Gill Street Mini-warehouse Development Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: 301 Gill Street
DEVELOPER:
Cantrell Bridge Self-storage
301 Gill Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
ENGINEER:
Summerline Associates, Inc
1609 South Broadway
Little Rock, AR 72206
AREA: 3.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: I-2, Light Industrial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 4 – Heights/Hillcrest
CENSUS TRACT: 15
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Reduced setbacks for the north, south and
east property lines.
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission approved a site plan for a mini-warehouse development for
this property on February 19, 1998. The approved site plan included seven (7) one-
story buildings to be constructed in two phases. The site plan was approved with
reduced side yard setbacks with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Public Works, Utility, Fire Department and Landscape
Comments.
2. Hours of operation for the mini-warehouse operation were from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm
daily.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1176-B
2
3. The roofs of the structures were to be of non-reflective colored metal.
4. The ends of the buildings were to be split-face block.
5. A wood fence was to be constructed across the front (Gill Street) property line.
On March 3, 1999, the applicant submitted a request to subdivide the 4.38-acre
property into two (2) lots and proposed a new site plan for the south lot to be developed
as Phase I and to retain the site plan for three (3) mini-warehouse buildings on the north
lot to be developed as Phase II. The approval included the development of Lot 1 with a
3,548 square foot building with a 2,240 square foot future expansion and a paved
parking area for nine (9) vehicles. The proposed building was to serve as a substation
for Comcast Cablevision, to include an office and equipment storage. The site was to
include twelve (12) satellite dishes located along the north and east sides of the
building. The substation site was to be enclosed with an eight (8) foot chain link
security fence. This development has taken place.
The Phase II portion of the development included construction of three (3) mini-
warehouse buildings as was approved on the February 19, 1998 site plan. The
applicant was approved reduced side yard setbacks (15-feet) along the north property
line and a 26-foot setback from the south property line. The conditions of the previous
approval continued to apply to the proposed development.
The Board of Directors approved an ordinance deferring the Master Street Plan
requirements for a period of two (2) years (Ordinance No. 17,975 dated April 6, 1999) or
until Lot 2 of the Gill Street Subdivision developed. The street improvements have not
been installed. The specific deferral was for pavement widening to 31-feet with
sidewalk for Lot 2 frontage.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the placement of seven (7) buildings of temperature
controlled mini-storage units on the site. The applicant has indicated there will
be a total of 198 units.
The applicant is also requesting reduced setbacks for the north, south and east
property lines.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing industrial building adjacent to a railroad right-of-
way. There is a private school located to the east of the site with a Planned
Office Development zoning. The area to the west of the site is a high bluff with
residential uses consisting of duplex and triplex housing. South of the site is a
“Dish Farm” for Comcast Cablevision. North of the site is an industrial building;
the user is unknown.
Gill Street is an unimproved street with no sidewalk, curb or gutter and broken
asphalt on the edges adjacent to the applicant’s property.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1176-B
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. The Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association along with
all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the
Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The proposed land use would classify Gill Street as a Commercial Street. A
minimum dedication of right-of-way of 60 feet (entire street width) will be
required. A reduced width is acceptable at the existing office building
encroachment to the north.
2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct full
width street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the
planned development.
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield).
5. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveways should be 250 feet
center to center, and 125 feet from the property boundary. The width of
driveway must not exceed 36 feet.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: An existing sewer main is located on the site. No construction of any
type of permanent facility other than driveways is to be located within five feet of the
existing sewer main. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for
additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1176-B
4
required in order to provide service to this property. The Little Rock Fire Department
needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire
hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be
installed at the Developer's expense. 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: Contact the Little Rock Department (Dennis Free) at 918-3752 for
additional details concerning access and fire hydrant.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: The plan submitted fails to provide for the six (6) foot nine (9) inch
wide minimum landscape strip along the northern perimeter of the site.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. George Cook was present representing the application. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed development indicating the request was a Subdivision
Site Plan review. Staff stated there were additional items needed to be shown on
the proposed site plan including all building setback dimensions, all building
separation dimensions and any proposed signage along with details
(height/area/location).
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff requested the applicant redesign
the driveway locations. Staff stated one driveway 36-feet in width was more
desirable than the proposed two locations. Staff stated Gill Street would be
required to be constructed to Master Street Plan standards adjacent to the
owner’s property on both sides.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1176-B
5
Staff noted comments from the various other agencies indicating Mr. Cook
should contact these individually for additional information. There was no further
discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has not indicated all the proposed building setbacks on the site plan.
The applicant has revised the site plan to include only one driveway location from
Gill Street. The applicant is proposing the placement of a 36-foot drive in this
location, the maximum allowed by ordinance.
The proposed site plan indicates the site to be enclosed with an eight foot chain
link fence. The site is zoned I-2, Light Industrial and an eight foot fence is an
allowable fence high for industrially zoned property. The applicant has indicated
the buildings will be a maximum of ten feet and constructed of steel siding. Staff
is not supportive of this design. The previous approval required the end of the
buildings to be constructed of split face block. The buildings were oriented east
and west while the proposal now places the buildings on a diagonal. Staff feels
the requirement the ends be constructed of split face block should remain. The
ends of the buildings will be oriented to Cantrell Road. The site is very visible
from the roadway and consideration should be given to the building material on
the site. The applicant has not indicated non-reflective roofing material, which
should also be considered. The site sits below a bluff with residential homes
located on the bluff. Staff feels it important these homes not be subject to glare
from the mini-warehouse development.
The required setbacks for I-2 zoned property are 50-foot front, 15-foot on each
side and 25-foot on the rear. The applicant has indicated a 50-foot front yard
setback and has not dimensioned the side and rear yard setbacks but they
appear to sit on the property line. Staff is not supportive of the reduced setbacks.
Staff feels even though the site abuts a railroad right-of-way the site is adjacent
to the newly completed Cathedral School and redevelopment should be
consistent with other redevelopment in the area.
The applicant has not increased the buffer area required along the northern
perimeter of the site. The ordinance requires a minimum of six feet nine inches
along the northern perimeter of the site. Staff would recommend the applicant
comply with the minimum ordinance requirement. Failure to provide the
minimum landscape strip will require approval from the City Beautiful
Commission.
The applicant has indicated signage will comply with signage allowed in industrial
zones. The signage allowed would be 30 feet in height and 72 square feet in
area. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from
7:00 am to 7:00 pm seven days per week.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1176-B
6
Although staff is supportive of the proposed use of the property staff is not
supportive of the proposed design. Staff feels since the site is visible from the
newly constructed Cathedral School and the Cantrell Road overpass the site
should be designed to be aesthetically pleasing. Staff feels the applicant should
construct the ends of the buildings of split face block and the roof material be
constructed of a non-reflective material. Staff also feels the applicant should
provide the required landscaping along the northern perimeter of the site.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Paul Davenport was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the
application as filed. Staff stated the developer had not indicated if one-half street
improvements would be made to Gill Street and asked for clarification of the developer’s
intentions.
Mr. Davenport stated the developer was willing to construct full street improvements if
required by the city for approval.
Chairman Nunnley questioned the developer if he was willing to construct the buildings
as presented by Staff; non-reflective roof materials and split face block on the ends of
the buildings. Mr. Davenport stated the developer was willing to construct the buildings
as presented by staff.
There was a general discussion concerning the setback issue related to the project.
Staff indicated the southern most building could be “flipped” to the western property line
to minimize staff’s concern. Mr. Davenport stated the relocation of the building would
not be a problem.
Staff stated the developer did not meet the required Landscape Ordinance requirement
along the northern boundary. Staff suggested the applicant work with staff to resolve
this issue and if the buildings were not adjusted to increase the landscape strip along
the northern perimeter then the applicant would be required to submit an application to
the City Beautiful Commission for approval.
A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion carried by a vote
of 8 ayes, 1 noe and 2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1403
NAME: Flatline Engine Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: 8400 Baseline Road
DEVELOPER:
KNR Hartnack Inc.
8400 Baseline Road
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
Hope Engineers
322 North Market Street
Benton, AR 72105
AREA: 1.772 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: I-2, Light Industrial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West
CENSUS TRACT: 41.03
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Variance from the driveway spacing
requirement.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the subdivision of this I-2, Light Industrial zoned tract into
two lots. Lot 2 is proposed to contain 0.888 acres and has an existing building
located on the site with access to Distribution Drive. The second lot is proposed
to contain 0.782 acres and will be accessed with a driveway cut from Baseline
Road. A portion of Lot 1 wraps around Lot 2 to provide access to Distribution
Drive from a 20-foot stem extending from Distribution Drive to the west. The
applicant is requesting a variance from the minimum driveway spacing
requirement along Baseline Road. The applicant has indicated the proposed
drive approximately seventeen feet from the property line.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1403
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing industrial building with a fenced area for storage.
There are other non-residential uses located east of the site, across Distribution
Drive, such as Arkansas Sign and Neon, Easy Cash and a carwash. South of
the site is multi-family housing and north of the site are industrial warehousing
activities along the Interstate Frontage Road. West of the site is a large industrial
building.
Baseline Road is constructed with four drive lanes and a center turn lane in this
area. There are sidewalks located on both sides of the street. No landscaping is
located in front of the existing industrial building.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. The West Baseline Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little
Rock United for Progress were notified of the Public Hearing along with all
abutting property owners.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Baseline Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial.
Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Prior to final platting, sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required
in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master
Street Plan on Distribution Drive.
3. The proposed lot split would not meet the access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. On an arterial street, driveways
should be located 300 feet from the adjacent street right-of-way (Distribution
Drive) 150' from the property boundary.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1403
3
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based
on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. A water main extension may be required in order to provide service to this
property. Central Arkansas Water requests that a 10-foot-wide utility easement be
dedicated adjoining the north right-of-way of Baseline Road. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or
private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they
will be installed at the Developer's expense. 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. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Robert Ellison was present representing the request. Staff stated the
request was to subdivide an existing lot into two lots. The existing lot has access
from Distribution Drive while the second lot will have access to Baseline Road.
Staff stated the request would not meet the driveway spacing requirements and
suggested the applicant request a variance to allow the driveway to be placed
along the western property line. Staff also noted the proposed lot line would
need to be relocated to allow a 15-foot building setback from the property line.
Staff questioned if the second lot would have access from Distribution Drive as
well. Staff requested the applicant provide a cross access easement along the
northern property line.
Staff noted although Wastewater had indicated no comment it would be in the
applicant’s best interest to contact them concerning access to the wastewater
collection system. Staff stated the main was located in Baseline Road and the
Highway Department would not allow Baseline Road to be cut. Staff stated water
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1403
4
also had similar concerns and suggested the applicant contact this agency as
well.
There was no further discussion of the item; the Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plat to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting held September 25, 2003. The
applicant has indicated a fifteen-foot side yard setback on both proposed lots and
the applicant has indicated a fifty-foot building setback for the new building along
Baseline Road. The site is zoned I-2 and the proposed setbacks meet the
minimum requirements.
The applicant has indicated Lot 1 wraps around Lot 2 allowing access to
Distribution Drive. Staff feels this is an appropriate configuration since the rear of
the building would not be accessible if the lot were not configured in this manner.
Staff is also supportive of the placement of the driveway near the property line on
this lot. Staff recommends this area be labeled as a cross access easement to
avoid any future concerns.
The applicant has indicated a new driveway location to serve Lot 1 from Baseline
Road. The drive has been placed near the western property line. Although the
proposed location does not meet the minimum ordinance requirement the
location is the best location. With the placement of the drive in this location the
drive is placed the greatest distance from the intersection of Baseline Road and
Distribution Drive. Staff feels not clogging the intersection is more critical than
centering the drive as is normally required.
The applicant has indicated the source of water will be from Central Arkansas
Water and the source of wastewater disposal will be by the Little Rock
Wastewater Utility.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The proposed request is a two-lot plat meeting the minimum
requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The minimum requirement for an I-2
zoned lot is 14,000 square feet and 100-feet of frontage. Staff feels the
proposed subdivision should have minimal to no 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 the above report.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow reduced driveway
spacing.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1403
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Robert Ellison was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. 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.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow
reduced driveway spacing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-1404
NAME: Lot 2R Michael Cove Addition Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: on the southeast corner of Kanis Road and Michael Drive
DEVELOPER:
AJ Gilbert
P.O. Box 95212
Little Rock, AR 72205
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue – Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 0.585 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 10 – Boyle Park
CENSUS TRACT: 24.03
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance to allow a reduced street side setback along Michael Drive.
2. A variance to allow a reduced land use buffer along the eastern perimeter.
3. A variance to allow a reduced street buffer along Michael Drive.
4. A variance to allow a reduced side and rear yard setback.
A. PROPOSAL:
The site is zoned C-3, General Commercial which allows the development of
multi-family housing at a density as allowed under R-5 (at a density of not more
than 36 units per acre). The applicant is proposing the development of this site
with two buildings of four-plex housing (13.68 units per acre).
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1404
2
A single driveway from Michael Drive will access the site. The applicant is
proposing the units to be two story townhouse units with a maximum building
height of 28-feet.
The lot is a corner lot. The applicant is requesting a reduced setback along
Michael Drive. The applicant is proposing a 10-foot setback along Michael Drive.
The applicant is also proposing a 15-foot rear yard setback and a 5-foot side yard
setback. The ordinance allows on a corner lot when 25-feet is provided on both
street frontages, the rear yard may be reduced to 15-feet.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site, which slopes from John Barrow Road to
the south. There are non-residential uses located in the area, a nursing home,
medical equipment sales and service and an office supply store. The area to the
west abuts John Barrow Road is a commercial node complete with fast food
restaurants, a strip commercial center and a convenience store. The area to the
south of the site is zoned MF-12 and built as multi-family. The area immediately
east of the site is vacant and tree covered.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property located within 200-feet of the site along with the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. The existing and proposed right-of-way dedications are acceptable.
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. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is
required for the project. A capacity contribution analysis is required. Contact
Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1404
3
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension may
be required in order to provide service to this property. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public
and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are
required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. 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. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: The plan submitted does not provide for the minimum nine (9) foot
wide required land use buffer along the eastern perimeter nor a portion of the
street buffer. The Landscape Ordinance requires a minimum six (6) foot nine (9)
inch wide landscape strip east of the proposed on-site vehicular use area. The
plan submitted only provides for five (5) six (6) inches in this area.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff stated the site
plan was for a multi-family development on C-3 zoned property. Staff stated the
applicant was requesting a subdivision site plan review for the placement of two
buildings on the site. Staff requested Mr. McGetrick provide additional
information concerning garages, phasing, garbage collection and signage. Staff
noted any site lighting must be low level in intensity and directed away from
residentially zoned properties.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan indicated
acceptable dedications of right-of-way. Staff also noted the storm water
detention ordinance did not apply to the property since the site was less than one
acre. Staff requested the applicant indicate detention on the site plan to assure
the adjacent sites were not affected.
Staff questioned if the units would be owner occupied. Mr. McGetrick indicated
they were intended to be owner occupied. Staff stated the required buffers were
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1404
4
not sufficient to meet the minimum nine-foot requirement. Mr. McGetrick
indicated the parking area would be redesigned allowing for additional
landscaping and buffering.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has redesigned the parking layout to include space for two cars at each
unit. The applicant has indicated one space will be a garage while the other
space will be outdoors.
The applicant has increased the landscaping strip required by the Landscaping
Ordinance adjacent to the vehicle use area to the required minimum six foot nine
inch wide strip. It appears the area set aside for the landscape strip is eleven
feet. The applicant has not however met the minimum land use buffer
requirement of nine feet nor has the applicant met entirely the minimum street
buffer requirement. The applicant has indicated a five (5) foot land use buffer
adjacent to the structures.
The applicant has indicated the site contains less than one acre therefore on site
detention is not required. The applicant has indicated with proper grading the
water will fall to Michael Drive and away from the developed property.
The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The
applicant has indicated garbage collection will be provided at the curb through an
agreement with a private contractor or the city.
The applicant has indicated the maximum building height at 28-feet with the
maximum height allowed on C-3 zoned property being 35-feet. The applicant
has indicated the development will be constructed in one phase.
Staff is not supportive of the reduced buffer along the street and along the
eastern perimeter of the site. Staff feels the proposed development is over-
building the site resulting in reduced setbacks and the inability to provide the
required land use buffer to the east. The applicant is required a nine-foot land
use buffer to the east and is only providing a five foot setback. In addition the
applicant is unable to meet the minimum required setbacks for C-3 zoned
property.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1404
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick and Mr. A. J. Gilbert were present representing the application.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a
recommendation of denial. Staff stated the proposed development could not meet all
the setbacks and buffer requirements therefore staff felt the developer was trying to
overbuild the site.
Staff stated the John Barrow Neighborhood Association had indicated they did not
support the proposed development as filed. Staff stated the neighborhood had
indicated they did support the concept of multi-family and would support the
development at a lesser density.
Mr. McGetrick addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the
development was allowable under the current zoning at a greater density than was
proposed. He stated the applicant was proposing the placement of the buildings
adjacent to Michael Drive within 10-feet of the property line but the required right-of-way
vs. the actual pavement width did allow for the appearance of a greater setback.
Mr. McGetrick stated it was unlikely Michael Drive would be widened to the full street
width as indicated by the Master Street Plan.
Mr. A. J. Gilbert addressed the Commission. He stated his desire was to develop the
site similar to a development he had completed on Gamble Road. He stated on the
Gamble Road development a variance was granted for side yard setbacks. He
questioned the difference in this site. Staff stated the Gamble Road site was not a
corner lot and the area was different. Staff stated the area to the east of the Michael
Drive site was still zoned residentially.
Mr. Gilbert stated his goal was to make the area a small community. He stated the units
would be offered for sale as condominium units.
There was a general discussion concerning the development, the reduced side yard
buffer and the likelihood of the area to the east developing as single-family. The
discussion included the likelihood of the widening of Michael Drive to commercial street
standard.
A motion was made to approve the proposed development as filed. The motion carried
by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 noe and 2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-3500-E
NAME: Pereira Revised Short-form PD-O
LOCATION: 212 North McKinley Street
DEVELOPER:
Vicki Tanner
20722 River View Court
Roland, AR 72135
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue – Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 0.52 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-O
ALLOWED USES: General and Professional Office
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-O
PROPOSED USE: Barber/Beauty Shop/Health Studio and Spa, Acupuncture Clinic
and O-1, Quiet Office District.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On May 11, 2000, the Planning Commission approved the rezoning of this property from
R-2 to PD-O for a “birth center”, and an accompanying land use plan amendment.
However, the applicant decided not to pursue the rezoning and withdrew it from the
Board of Director’s agenda. The applicant did follow through with the land use plan
amendment, and on June 20, 2000, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No.
18,296. This ordinance changed the land use plan for this property and the two (2)
properties immediately north from SF (Single-family) to SO (Suburban Office).
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3500-E
2
The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,460 on April 17, 2001,
approving a rezoning from R-2 to PD-O, which established Pereira Short-form PD-O.
This allowed for an acupuncture clinic with one doctor and two additional staff members
to locate on the site. The applicant proposed an accessory herb dispensary, which was
for the clinic’s patients only. The applicant also requested O-1 uses as alternative uses
for the site.
As a part of the request the applicant was approved a four year deferral of the required
sidewalk construction along North McKinley Street.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant is now requesting a change in the allowable uses for the site. The
applicant is requesting a barber/beauty shop/health studio spa be added as an
alternative use available to locate on the site in addition to O-1 uses and the
acupuncture clinic with one doctor and two additional staff members and the
accessory herb dispensary, which is for the clinic’s patients only as
alternate/future uses of the building. The approval is for a single use
development allowing only one use at a time to locate on the site. The hours of
operation are proposed from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing two-story stucco building on the site, with a circular drive.
There is paved parking along the east property line, adjacent to North McKinley
Street. There is an existing six-foot wood-screening fence along the south, west
and a portion of the north property line.
There are single-family residences immediately north, south and west of the site.
Park Plaza Mall is located across North McKinley Street to the east.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Briarwood Neighborhood Association along with all property owners located
within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within
300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. Staff has received no
comment as of this writing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The middle driveway should be
removed.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3500-E
3
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Due to the nature of water uses in this facility, installation of
an approved backflow preventer will be required on the domestic water service.
Contact Carroll Keatts, Central Arkansas Water's Cross Connection Program
Administrator at 992-2431, to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this
project.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The
applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Office Development to
add barber, beauty, and health-clinic-spa to existing O-1 uses.
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 Midtown Neighborhoods Action Plan. The Commercial
Development goal listed two action statements relevant to this case. The first
action is to embrace the residential character of the community and architectural
rhythm. The second action is to maintain appropriate scale and footprint of non-
residential buildings located in the neighborhood.
Landscape: No comment received.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the issue being considered was a
use issue. Staff stated they would contact the applicant and request any
additional information necessary to complete the review. There was no further
discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3500-E
4
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicted the connection of the drives between 212 North McKinley
Street and 216 North McKinley street will not be made and is requesting the two
existing drives be allowed to remain in place on the site at 212 North McKinley
Street. Staff is supportive of the two drives remaining since there will not be a
change to the exterior of the structure only the proposed uses.
The primary issue related to the proposed request relates to use. The applicant
is requesting a barber beauty shop and health studio/spa be added to the listed
uses available on the site. Presently the site can be used for acupuncture clinic
with one doctor and two additional staff members, an accessory herb dispensary,
which is for the clinic’s patients only and O-1 uses as alternative uses for the site.
There are nine (9) parking spaces located on the site. The typical parking
demand for a barber/beauty shop would be one (1) space for every two hundred
(200) square feet of gross floor area. The gross floor area of the structure
contains applicant 2,332 square feet, which would typically require eleven (11)
parking spaces. Staff feels the proposed parking should meet the demand. The
applicant has indicated additional parking could be added to the rear of the
structure should parking become an issue. Staff would recommend against this
since the site abuts single-family to the west. Staff feels with the placement of
parking in the rear of the structure this could introduce a negative element to
those homes abutting the parking area with increased noise and activity. Should
additional parking be required the existing asphalt parking area to the south may
be extended to the west ending at the western edge of the building, allowing
three additional spaces and the stacking of automobiles. These spaces should
be designated as employee parking only.
Sufficient parking would be the only concern of staff and staff feels the existing
nine (9) spaces should meet the typical demand. The proposed addition of the
barber/beauty shop and health studio and spa should have minimal to no impact
on the area. The applicant has indicated the average customer’s stay is a
minimum of two to four hours. There will be a maximum of five employees with
two operators on the site. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be
from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Saturday. The site abuts Park Plaza
Mall to the east and there are only three structures, one of which is a residential
unit, which access North McKinley Street in this area. The increased traffic is
not a concern.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3500-E
5
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The request is to add a specific use to the listed alternative
uses for the site. With a single use planned development (PD-O) only one use at
a time will be allowed to locate on the site. The proposed request is consistent
with the City’s Future Land Use Plan. Staff feels the proposed revision should
have minimal to no 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Ms. Vicki Tanner was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the
request to add barber/beauty shop/health studio and spa as an alternative use 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 item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-2850-B
NAME: Tanner Revised Shot-form POD
LOCATION: 216 North McKinley Street
DEVELOPER:
Vicki Tanner
20722 River View Court
Roland, AR 72135
ENGINEER:
Donald Brooks
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 0.30 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: POD
ALLOWED USES: General and Professional Office
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD
PROPOSED USE: Acupuncture Clinic, General and Professional Office and O-1, Quiet
Office District.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On July 23, 1974 the Commission denied an application to rezone the site from A –
Single-family to F - Commercial.
On April 15, 2003, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,852 establishing
Tanner Short-form POD. The applicant intended to utilize an existing 1700 square foot
residential structure as an office use for general and professional office type users. The
applicant also indicated a hard surface drive would be extended from North McKinley
Street and four parking spaces would be added to the site in the front yard area. The
construction has not taken place.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2850-B
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant now requesting an acupuncture clinic with one doctor and two
additional staff members and an accessory herb dispensary be an allowable use
for the site. In addition the applicant is requesting O-1, Quiet Office District uses
be considered as alternate/future uses of the building. The hours of operation
are proposed from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
The applicant has indicated the parking will be extended to include the
development of six (6) parking spaces on the site.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing single-story stucco building on the site, with a single gravel
drive. There is paved parking along the east property line, adjacent to North
McKinley Street. There is an existing six-foot wood-screening fence along the
south, west and a portion of the north property line.
There are single-family residences immediately north, south and west of the site.
Park Plaza Mall is located across North McKinley Street to the east.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Briarwood Neighborhood Association along with all property owners located
within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within
300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. Staff has received no
comment as of this writing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The middle driveway should be
removed.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2850-B
3
Central Arkansas Water: 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. Contact Carroll Keatts, Central Arkansas Water's Cross Connection Program
Administrator at 992-2431, if you would like to discuss backflow prevention
requirements for this project.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The
applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Office Development
for a change to allow O-1 uses.
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 Midtown Neighborhoods Action Plan. The Commercial
Development goal listed two action statements relevant to this case. The first
action is to embrace the residential character of the community and architectural
rhythm. The second action is to maintain appropriate scale and footprint of non-
residential buildings located in the neighborhood.
Landscape: No comment received.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the issue being considered was a
use issue. Staff stated they would contact the applicant and request any
additional information necessary to complete the review. There was no further
discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicted the connection of the two drives between 212 North
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2850-B
4
McKinley Street and 216 North McKinley Street will not be made and is
requesting the two drives located at 212 North McKinley Street be allowed to
remain in place. Staff is supportive of the two drives remaining since there will
not be a change to the exterior of the structure only the proposed uses.
The applicant’s request is to allow an acupuncture clinic with one doctor; two
additional staff members and the accessory herb dispensary be an allowable use
for the site. The typical minimum parking demand for a clinic would be six (6)
spaces per doctor. There are four spaces shown on the previously approved site
plan but construction has not taken place. The applicant has indicated five
spaces will be added to the front yard area and a sixth space added to the south
side of the building. An existing storage building will be relocated to the rear of
the structure to allow a staff member parking space in this area.
In addition the applicant is requesting O-1, Quiet Office District uses be
considered as alternate/future uses of the building. Staff feels this appropriate.
The original proposal included general and professional office uses only. Staff
feels the request to allow O-1 uses as alternative uses is consistent with
development in the area. The site abuts Park Plaza Mall to the east and there
are only three structures, which access North McKinley Street in this area. Only
one of these structures is currently being used as a single-family home.
The hours of operation proposed are from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through
Friday. The proposed hours should have minimal to no impact on the single-
family homes located west of the site.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The proposed request is consistent with the City’s Future
Land Use Plan. Staff feels the proposed revision should have minimal to no
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.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Ms. Vicki Tanner was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the
request to add additional alternative uses and in addition to the uses requested to allow
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2850-B
5
an animal clinic or a antique shop to locate on the site 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 item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
NAME: Hickory Grove Revised Long-form PD-R
LOCATION: on the west side of Hinson Road, south of Pebble Beach
DEVELOPER:
EV-Mark Development, LLC
P.O. Box 241850
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
The Mehlburger Firm
201 South Izard Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 38.62 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 65 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-R
ALLOWED USES: Townhouse development
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Detached Single-family
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variances –
1. Reduced lot width for Lots 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24, 25, 26, 33, 34, 40, 44 and 45.
2. Increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 10, 11, 13 – 15 and 51, 57 – 61.
3. Reduced front and side yard setbacks – 5-feet on each and a reduced rear yard
setback 10-feet.
4. A variance to allow Lots 15, 16, 17, 24, 25, 26 and 33 – 38 to develop as double
frontage lots.
BACKGROUND:
The property is the remaining 40+ acres of a 120-acre parcel or the eastern 1/3 of the
property owned by the First Baptist Church. The site was originally proposed as a
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
2
multipurpose facility with residential, school and church facility. The western 80 acres
have since developed as a single-family neighborhood.
This property was zoned MF-6, Multi-family District (six (6) units per gross acre allowed)
in mid-1981. A “Declaration of Covenants” was filed and recorded in 1981, which runs
with the property. The private covenants regulate the property’s use and portion of the
property’s development.
The private covenants state that the property will be developed for condominium units
developed pursuant to the Horizontal Property Act being Act 60 of 1961 (units for sale
only, no rental units). The covenants designate certain areas of the property as OS
(Open Space) and require a six (6) foot high privacy fence be constructed at one
location prior to any construction. The covenants also state that structures built in one
area of the property not exceed one and one-half stories in height; both located on the
northern boundary of the site.
A preliminary plat and a multiple building site plan review were filed on the site in May
1997, to allow the construction of 234 apartment units in 10 three-story buildings. Prior
to the Public Hearing; the applicant requested the application be withdrawn from
consideration.
A proposal was filed in March 2000, to develop a portion of the site (18.47 acres) with
22 buildings of owner occupied condominium housing. The application was later
withdrawn from consideration without prejudice prior to the Public Hearing.
Ordinance No. 18,884 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 3, 2003,
rezoned this 39-acre site from MF-6 to a Planned Residential Development with 83
units. The applicant proposed to develop the site in three (3) phases with zero-lot line
townhouses, each of which would have its own lot of record. A common wall would be
shared by each structure, which would be dissected by the common property line. This
would allow some measure of property on each end of the structure for maintenance of
the building. The structures would have enclosed garages facing a private street with a
private courtyard on the rear of each townhouse unit.
The applicant proposed the construction of a bridge across the creek that separates this
property from Hinson Road. The bridge would be constructed in the first phase. The
applicant proposed a public roadway to connect with Hinson Road and Dorado Beach
Drive. The road would be constructed when one of the abutting lots was final platted.
There were two other streets proposed as a part of the development, which the
applicant intended to maintain as private streets.
There were three areas designated by covenants in the deed that were not to be
encroached upon by building construction. The applicant indicated the areas of
non-encroachment on the proposed development plan and indicated the covenants to
be in force.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
3
Ordinance No. 18,883, also adopted June 3, 2003, allowed the requested variances for
lots without public street frontage, an increased lot depth to width ratio and a variance to
allow double frontage lots. The lots were sized to accommodate the building plans as
required in the Subdivision Ordinance for zero-lot line developments.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to amend the PD-R to allow the creation of 65 detached
single-family lots on this 38.62 acre site. The developer has indicated the
retention of the green spaces as was previously proposed in the areas to the
north and south of the site. The applicant has indicated Dorado Beach Drive will
be extended as was previously approved (as one of the lots abutting the roadway
is final platted).
The applicant is requesting variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow an
increased depth to width ratio, a reduced front lot width, a reduced platted
building line and reduced side and rear yard setbacks for specific lots within the
development. The developer has indicated the internal streets will be maintained
as private streets and be gated. The applicant has also indicated the
development will be constructed in three phases.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded. The Windsor Court
Condominium development and single-family residences are located to the
south, with single-family residences to the north. There is undeveloped R-2,
Single-family property to the west, with single-family residences further west.
Single-family residences and undeveloped R-2 property are also located across
Hinson Road to the east.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association and the Hillsborough
Property Owners Association, all residents located within 300 feet of the site,
who could be identified and all owners of property located within 200 feet of the
site were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, Staff has received
several informational phone calls from area residents.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. All previous comments apply on this subdivision apply to this modification.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
4
2. A sidewalk is required on Dorado Beach Drive including the bridge.
3. The gated entrances will have to be re-designed to prevent stacking of
vehicles out into the public street. Gates should be set back three car lengths
(60') from the right-of-way and provide a lane for entrance u-turns.
4. Regarding fence and wall construction: In accordance with Section 32-8, no
obstruction to visibility shall be located within a triangular area 50 feet back
from the intersecting right-of-way line (or intersecting tangent lines for radial
dedications) at street intersections.
5. Additional hill-side drainage easements should be provided. Relocation of
existing drainage ways should be minimized.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required
for the project. Existing 10-inch sewer main located along Hinson Road is area of
proposed floodway improvements. Relocation of the existing main is required to
remove manholes and sewer main from the area of improvements. Other existing
mains are located on site with easements that must be retained. Contact Little Rock
Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: A public water main adequate to provide needed fire
protection and water service to each lot will be required adjacent to the proposed
roads. 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: All gates must have a 20-foot opening. Place fire hydrants per
code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
5
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant
has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Development - Residential for
new houses.
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 Residential
Development goal listed the objective of developing Neo-traditional
neighborhoods (pedestrian and bicycle friendly neighborhoods, which are less
dependent on automobiles), in areas that have not yet developed. Action
statements listed include enforcing the construction of sidewalks with all types of
development, insuring the physical continuity of sidewalks, enforcing the
installation of curb and gutter, require the installment of underground utilities, and
requiring the installation of street lighting by the time streets are opened.
Landscape: No comment received.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented the item
indicating the request was to revise a previously approved PD-R to allow the
construction of detached single-family homes. Staff noted the areas set aside for
buffer were still intact. Staff suggested the applicant remove these areas from
the lots and retain the areas as tracts to be maintained by the Property Owners
Association.
Staff expressed concerns with the development only allowing a five foot front
yard setback. Staff questioned homeowners backing from their drives into the
right-of-way before being able to see oncoming traffic. There was a lengthy
discussion concerning building placement and driveway location, which would
not require motorist to back into the right-of-way prior to viewing oncoming traffic.
Staff suggested the applicant review the proposed design and provide additional
information of how staff concerns could be addressed.
Staff also indicated the proposed gate design did not meet with ordinance
requirements. Staff stated the applicant should reconsider the design to allow
sufficient area for motorist to wait and not back up traffic in the street.
Public Works Comments were addressed. Staff noted all previous comments
would continue to apply to the proposed development. Staff asked if the street
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
6
would be developed as was previously proposed. The applicant indicated the
street would be constructed when any of the lots abutting Dorado Beach Drive
began to develop.
Staff noted comments from other reporting agencies. 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 at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has removed the buffer areas from the proposed lots. Staff is
supportive of this arrangement. Staff feels the undisturbed areas should not be
included in prospective lots to avoid any possibility of the property owner clearing
the area at some point in the future.
The applicant has indicated Dorado Beach Drive will be extended as was
previously approved. The road will be extended when any lot abutting the road is
final platted. This includes Lots 15 – 17, 24 –26, 33 – 38 and 51 – 65.
The applicant has indicated the development as a gated community. There are
two gates from Dorado Beach Drive just past the Hinson Road intersection; one
to gate the area to the south and one to gate the area to the north. The applicant
has set the gate at sixty feet from the intersection as required by Traffic
Engineering. The applicant has indicated the gates will maintain an eighteen foot
opening as required by the Fire Department. There is also a gate located near
where Dorado Beach Drive exits the subdivision. This will gate the lots located in
Phase III, which are to be accessed by a private service drive paralleling Dorado
Beach Drive. This proposed gate does not meet ordinance requirements.
The applicant has not indicated a no right-of-vehicle access along the rear of the
lots abutting Dorado Beach Drive. Staff feels this should be put in place to limit
the number of curb cuts along the roadway; a collector street.
The applicant has indicated a maximum building area on the proposed lots. The
applicant has requested a 20-foot platted building line if the lots are to be front-
loaded garages and a 5-foot platted building line if the lots are to be side loaded
garages. The applicant is also requesting 10-foot rear yard setbacks and 5-foot
side yard setback. Staff has reservations of supporting this request. Although the
applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance will detail the building lines and no
owner of a front loaded garage will be able to build to the 5-foot build line staff
feels this causes confusion on the part of potential homeowners. Staff feels the
reduced side and rear yard setbacks do not warrant a 5-foot front yard setback.
Staff feels allowing the buildings to be constructed to a 20-foot front yard setback
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-C
7
allows for sufficient area for construction of the potential homes. Staff would
however recommend if the Commission feels a 5-foot build line is acceptable for
the development that the Commission limit the area to the garages only and
require the actual body of the home to be constructed at the 20-foot build line.
The applicant has indicated signage has not been determined. The applicant
has stated signage will comply with signage allowed in residential zones. The
applicant has indicated should signage not comply with allowable signage then a
variance will be sought. The applicant also has not indicated fencing. The
applicant has indicated fencing has not yet been determined and if fencing does
not comply with ordinance requirements for residential zones, a variance will be
requested. Staff recommends the applicant resolve the signage and fencing
issue at this time since any variances must be addressed through the Planning
Commission and the Board of Directors.
In a written opinion from the City Attorney the applicant has meet the criteria of
the previously imposed covenants. The applicant has indicated and not intruded
into the previously identified green spaces.
Although staff is supportive of the concept of the development staff is not
supportive of the request as filed by the applicant. Staff feels there are too many
unresolved issues associated with the request (front platted building line, the
proposed signage, the proposed fencing, the no right-of-vehicle access along
Dorado Beach Drive and the gate at the private service drive paralleling Dorado
Beach Drive) to allow staff to recommend approval of the request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval subject to compliance
with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance from the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced lot width for Lots 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24,
25, 26, 33, 34, 40, 44 and 45, a variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio
for Lots 10, 11, 13 – 15 and 51, 57 – 61, a variance to allow a reduced front and side
yard setback – 5-feet on each and a reduced rear yard setback 10-feet and a variance
to allow Lots 15, 16, 17, 24, 25, 26 and 33 – 38 to develop as double frontage lots.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
NAME: Bowman and Kanis Retail Center Short-form PCD
LOCATION: On the northwest corner of Kanis Road and Bowman Road
DEVELOPER:
Dickson Flake Partners
1200 West Capitol
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 8.1 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, with conditions
ALLOWED USES: O-3 and C-2 permitted uses with a 300-foot by 150-foot no
build area
PROPOSED ZONING: C-3, O-3 and PCD
PROPOSED USE: Creation of a seven (7)-lot plat with Lot 1 to develop as a PCD for
USA Drug, Lot 7 to develop with O-3 listed uses and Lots 2 – 6 to develop with C-3
listed uses.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow reduced driveway spacing
for Lot 1.
BACKGROUND:
On October 20, 1998, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,850
rezoning an 11.25-acre tract to O-3 and C-3 on the northwest corner of Kanis and
Bowman Roads. The proposal included the development of the site with a 300 foot by
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
2
150 foot no build area at the intersection of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The site had
limited driveways onto Kanis Road. The eastern drive, located approximately 200-feet
west of the Kanis/Bowman Road intersection, was proposed as a right-turn exit only.
The western driveway, located approximately 300 feet west of the Kanis/Bowman
intersection, was to be a service entrance/exit only. The approval also limited the
permitted uses to those listed in the “C-2” Shopping Center District.
A proposal which included this tract of land was reviewed and approved by the
Commission earlier this year but was not forwarded to the Board of Directors for final
action. The applicant proposed to rezone the site from various zoning classifications to
PCD to allow the development of a home center on the site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing a seven lot plat through the Planned
Development process. Lots 1 - 6 are zoned C-3, General Commercial and Lot 7
is zoned O-3, General Office. The applicant is proposing a USA Drug to locate
on Lot 1 (an allowable use under the C-3 zoning classification) but the building is
proposed to be located within the area previously approved as a no-build zone
(300-foot by 150-foot).
The applicant has indicated only one lot will be developed at this time and is
requesting Lot 1 be designated with PCD zoning retaining the C-3 and O-3
zoning on the other six lots.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing non-conforming nursery. The property is located in
an area of mixed zoning and extremely varies uses. The intensely commercial
Chenal Parkway/Bowman Road intersection is directly north of the site. Uses in
this area include a wide variety of retail commercial businesses such as Sam’s,
Walmart, Garden Ridge and Best Buy. A new shopping center has developed
across Bowman Road to the east. Also across Bowman, at the northeast corner
of Kanis and Bowman Road is a PCD, which has developed as an
office/warehouse/retail center. The C-3 and PCD zoned properties to the south;
contain a variety of uses including offices, office/warehouse and mini-
warehouses. The area to the west of the site contains single-family homes on
large tracts.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association, all owners
of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within
300-feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The plans indicate the developer is to dedicate right-of-way and construct the
streets to Master Street Plan standards.
2. Extra right-of-way and pavement width may be required to accommodate dual
left turn lanes. Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering, at 379-1816.
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
4. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e)
showing compliance with the land alteration ordinance.
5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
6. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping, and traffic signal
modifications. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to
construction.
7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveways must be located 300'
back from the intersection right-of-way, 300' center to center, and 150' from
the property boundary.
8. An access easement should be platted at the location of the existing private
driveway.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
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 installation will be inspected by
an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer
Owned Line Agreement is required. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
4
and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the
expense of the developer. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will
apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system.
Please submit two copies of the plans for the private fire line to Central Arkansas
Water for review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for
installation of private fire line. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of
Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Central
Arkansas Water requests that a 15-foot-wide utility easement be dedicated adjoining
the west lot line of Lot 7 to accommodate an existing 2-inch water main. All Central
Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must
be met. 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. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property.
The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for new office
and commercial 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 Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and
Commercial Development goal encourages the promotion of commercial and
office development that maintains as much as possible of the existing
topography, trees and green space; and enhances the primarily residential
character of the community. The plan also lists an objective that encourages all
commercial and office development in the community to be subject to
neighborhood input prior to City approval. The plan also lists the action
statements of adhering to the Land Use Plan and to aggressively use Planned
Zoning Districts (PZDs) to influence more neighborhood-friendly and better
quality developments.
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping comply with ordinance
requirements.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
5
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the request
was the creation of a seven-lot plat and the rezoning of one lot to PCD. Staff
stated the rezoning request was instituted by a 300-foot by 150 foot no build
area. Staff stated the request was to construct a USA Drug in this area. Staff
requested Mr. White indicate on the site plan access to the C-3 zoned property
located to the west. Staff stated the access must be provided from Bowman
Road, across the commercially zoned property, and not from Kanis Road or the
property zoned for office uses.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the proposed driveways
were located too close to the property line and the intersection. Staff requested
the applicant relocate the proposed drives to between Lots 5 and 6 and between
Lots 2 and 3. Mr. White stated he would consider the alternative location for the
driveways. Staff stated the relocation would allow for the minimum intersection
spacing requirement.
There was a general discussion concerning the placement of access to the
property located to the west and zoned C-3. That property owner was present to
review the proposed plan. Staff noted once again access to the commercially
zoned property must be taken from the commercially zoned property located to
the east.
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 at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated signage on each individual lot and indicated signage will
comply with that allowed in commercial zones, (36-feet in height and 160 square
feet in area). The applicant has also indicated access to Lot 14, Montclair
Subdivision via Bowman Road. The proposed driveway works well for accessing
the property as single-family but staff has concerns how access will be provided
if and when the site is developed as commercial property. The site is zoned C-3,
General Commercial and staff feels proper consideration should be taken to
ensure the applicant is able to develop his property as it is zoned.
The applicant has indicated shared driveways for the development. The drives
are to be located between Lots 5 and 6 and on Lot 2. The two drives along
Bowman Road are proposed at 36-feet; the maximum allowed by ordinance.
Staff is supportive of the placement and the proposed widths of these driveways.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
6
The drives along Kanis Road are proposed as single drives to each of the lots
(Lot 1 and Lot 7). The drive proposed for Lot 1 is located approximately
300-feet from the intersection but only 100-feet from the property line. The
ordinance requires driveway spacing to be at 300-feet from the intersection and
150-feet from property lines [Section 31-210(e)(1)]. Staff is supportive of the
proposed location.
The applicant is requesting a PCD for the development of Lot 1 to allow the
building to be constructed in the previously reserved 150-foot by 300-foot no
build area. The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed at
approximately 140 feet with an awning extending further into the no build area
(approximately 125-feet). Staff is supportive of the placement of the building in
this area. The previous requirements were put in place to limit the “hard retail”
that could locate on the corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads. Staff feels the
proposed retail use will have limited effect on the area since the development
has limited the number of driveway locations on the site and will not have any
outdoor activities.
The applicant is proposing the creation of a seven (7)-lot plat as a part of the
proposed planned development. The corner lot will be zoned PCD while the
remaining lots will be zoned O-3 and C-3. The applicant is proposing the lots to
conform to the specific zoning classification. The proposed lot requirements of
C-3 and O-3 zoning are the same and each of the lots will have a minimum
frontage of 100-feet and a minimum lot area of 14,000 square feet.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request.
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 approval of the requested variance to allow reduced driveway
spacing for Lot 1.
Staff recommends the applicant provide access to Lot 14, Montclair Subdivision
via Bowman Road. The site is zoned C-3, General Commercial and staff
recommends proper consideration be taken to ensure the applicant is able to
develop the site as it is zoned.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6544-A
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no objectors present.
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.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow
reduced driveway spacing for Lot 1.
Staff recommended the applicant provide access to Lot 14, Montclair Subdivision via
Bowman Road. The site is zoned C-3, General Commercial and staff recommended
proper consideration be taken to ensure the owner is able to develop the site as it is
zoned.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-6681-A
NAME: Highland Pointe Apartments Long-form PD-R
LOCATION: North of Cantrell Road, at the end of Townsend Street
DEVELOPER:
ERC Properties, Inc.
815 Fort Stewart
Barling, AR 72923
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 13.5 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: MF-12 and O-3
ALLOWED USES: Multi-family up to 12 units per acre and O-3 listed uses
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Multi-family 16 units per acre.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On June 10, 1999, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal to rezone a site
containing 39 acres from R-2, MF-6 and OS to O-3, MF-12 and OS. The Board of
Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,062 on July 20, 1999. The rezoning request
included the reclassification of 4.13 acres of OS zoned property, 16.39 acres of MF-6
zoned property and 19 acres of R-2 zoned property. The rezoning resulted in 18.92
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6681-A
2
acres of OS zoned property, 10.4 acres of MF-12 zoned property and 9.6 acres of O-3
zoned property. The applicant indicated the zoning of the 18.9-acre tract of OS
property would preserve a heavily wooded hillside and would provide an appropriate
buffer between any development and the nearby residential properties.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the construction of 216 units of multi-family housing. The
applicant proposes two and three story buildings with a mix of one, two and three
bedroom units. The applicant is proposing 56 one-bedroom units, 112
two-bedroom units and 48 three-bedroom units. The development will be
constructed in one phase. A clubhouse with pool sits in the center of the
proposed development. Parking is provided at 425 spaces with a mix of
garages, carports and open parking. The garages will not be included within the
buildings, but constructed detached.
The applicant has indicated Townsend Street will be extended with 36-feet of
pavement and a 60-foot right-of-way. The applicant has indicated the street will
end in a “T” turn-around.
The applicant has indicated the construction material to be of Hardi-board and
brick veneer with split face CMU. The site plan indicates the roof material to be
architectural composite shingles. The applicant as indicated a three-foot wood
fence would be placed along residence patio areas.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant wooded site with limited access. There is a PCD located
along Cantrell Road where the recently completed Twin City Bank has located.
There are two vacant lots associated with the Planned Development, which have
not developed. The Pankey Community and the under construction Pankey
Community Center are located south of the site. Pankey contains a variety of
uses single-family, churches and non-conforming uses. The area to the north of
the site is vacant and zoned Open Space. The area west of the site has
developed as the Kroger Center and vacant O-2 zoned property.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Pankey Community Improvement Association, the Walton
Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood Association and the Piedmont Property
Owners Association along with all residents located within 300-feet of the site
who could be identified 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.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6681-A
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Townsend Street will have to be constructed and dedicated as shown on the
plans.
2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
3. To show compliance with the land alteration plan, a Sketch Grading and
Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required
for the project. Capacity contribution analysis is required. Contact the Little Rock
Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
required in order to provide water service to this property. 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. The facilities on-site will be private.
When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to
Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation
will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas.
Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or
private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they
will be installed at the Developer's expense. 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.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6681-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: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Multi-family and Office for this property. The
applicant has applied for a Planned Development - Residential for apartments.
The application is larger than the area shown as multifamily. Since the
boundaries between land use designations are theoretical, and a small portion of
the applicant’s property is shown as Office leaving a large area shown as Office
located outside the application area, a land use plan amendment is not needed.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable
Natural Environment goal listed the action statements of preserving the Highway
10 Design Overlay District, vigorously enforcing the ordinance for hillside
protection, and vigorously enforcing the ordinance for the preservation of trees.
Landscape: The areas set aside for buffers and landscaping appear to meet
with ordinance requirements provided there would not be easements along the
southernmost perimeter. The only exception to this being a small portion of the
southern perimeter near Townsend Street which fails to provide the six (6) feet
nine (9) inch minimum width.
A six (6) foot high screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed
outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern and
eastern perimeters and that portion of the southern perimeter abutting residential
property. The requirement along the northern and eastern perimeters may not
be deemed necessary because of the wide tree-covered OS strips immediately
adjacent. Credit toward fulfilling screening requirements can be given for existing
on-site trees and vegetation that fulfill this year-around requirement.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6681-A
5
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees
as feasible on this tree-covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape
Ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6)
inch caliper or larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
The applicants were present representing the request. Staff stated the request
was a rezoning request to Planned Residential Development to allow the site to
develop as a multi-family complex. Staff stated the site was currently zoned MF-
12 and O-3 both of which allow for a form of multi-family development. Staff
requested the applicant provide additional information concerning construction
materials, signage and garbage collection. Staff questioned if the developer
would construct the entire street to the development. The applicant indicated this
was the case.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a land alteration plan and
sketch grading and drainage plan would be required prior to development.
Landscaping comments were addressed. The applicant questioned if screening
would be required along the northern and eastern perimeters. Staff stated the
Commission could deem this unnecessary since the site abutted an open space
zone area.
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 on October 1, 2003 addressing
the concerns raised at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting.
The applicant has indicated all building setback dimensions from the property
lines, details of all proposed fencing and dumpster locations. The applicant has
also indicated the development will be gated with two gate entrances.
The proposed development includes the placement of 216 multi-family units in
sixteen (16) buildings and 425 parking spaces. The applicant is also proposing
the placement of a clubhouse on the site. The applicant has indicated the
buildings will be two and three story buildings and a maximum of thirty-five (35)
feet in height. The applicant is proposing reduced side yard setbacks than is
typically required along the east and west property lines. Typically setbacks are
equal to the height of the building. On a few of the buildings, the setback does
not appear to be equal to the proposed height of the building. Staff is supportive
of the proposed building placement and the proposed setbacks.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6681-A
6
The applicant is also requesting screening not be required along the northern
and eastern perimeters of the site. The site abuts a 100-foot OS zoned strip.
Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant has indicated they will minimize
the reduced screening by preserving on-site trees and vegetation. The applicant
has indicated the minimum six foot nine inch landscape strip will be installed
along the southern perimeter and screening will be placed in this area.
The applicant is proposing the placement of 425 parking spaces. The applicant
has indicated of these 425 there will be 108 covered spaces with either a carport
or a garage. The typical minimum parking required for a multi-family
development of this size would be one and one-half spaces per unit or 324
parking spaces. The proposed parking is more than sufficient to meet the
minimum parking demand for the development.
The applicant has indicated the signage will comply with signage allowed on
multi-family zones. The signage will not exceed twenty-four square feet in sign
area and six feet in height. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage.
The applicant has indicated there will be one garbage collection location in the
site. The applicant has indicated the collector will be a compactor with the
placement of the compactor in a well and the top of the compactor at grade. The
applicant has indicated this type garage collection works well by allowing larger
amounts of garbage to be collected at one location by reducing the need for a
large number of dumpster locations on the site.
A mail kiosk will be placed near the office/clubhouse site.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
The site is zoned MF-12 and O-3. The site contains approximately 10 acres of
MF-12 zoned property and approximately 3 acres of O-3 zoned property. The O-
3 zoning classification allows multi-family development at a density of up to 36
units per acre. The applicant is proposing a density of 16 units per acre. Staff is
supportive of the proposed development and the proposed density.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6681-A
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Jim Hathaway were present representing the request. There
were two registered objectors present. Staff stated the Commission had been give a
petition signed by several Pankey Community Residents. Staff stated the rezoning
request did not include any portion of the platted Pankey Subdivision. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval of the proposed rezoning request.
Ms. Selma Miller Douglas addressed the Commission in opposition of the rezoning
request. Ms. Douglas stated the residents did not want the area rezoned to
commercial. She stated the Pankey residents wanted the community to remain
residential. Ms Douglas stated apartments were considered by the Pankey residents as
a commercial use.
Mr. Horace A. Walker addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed
rezoning request. He stated he had been retained by many of the Pankey property
owners to address the Commission on their behalf. Mr. Walker stated the residents of
Pankey wanted the area to remain residential and not be rezoned to a non-residential
use.
Mr. Jim Hathaway addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the
proposed development would require a lesser buffer along the north and eastern
perimeters. He stated the development abutted a 100-foot zoned buffer strip in this
area and if buffers were put in place they would provide buffering to zoned open space
property. Mr. Hathaway also stated the proposed development was located north of the
Pankey Community and the developer was not rezoning any portion of the originally
platted Pankey Subdivision.
Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, questioned Mr. Joe White, the
engineer for the project, if the developer could allow additional buffering to the south.
Mr. White stated southern buffer was currently shown at 15 to 20-feet. He stated the
developer could increase the area to 25-feet and plant the buffer. He stated for the area
to remain undisturbed would be a challenge in the detention area.
Mr. White stated he was requesting to amend his application to increase the buffer area
to the south to 25-feet and to allow the undisturbed buffer area to the south to be
encroached upon if need be and be replanted.
Ms. Douglas requested clarification as to the proposed location of the rezoning request.
Staff stated the area was located north of the Pankey Subdivision. Ms. Douglas stated
Blocks 35 and 36 would remain zoned and vacant. Staff stated the current rezoning
request would not affect Blocks 35 and 36 and they would remain in their current state.
A motion was made to approve the proposed rezoning request as amended. The
motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-6863-C
NAME: Michael’s Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: 1701 Rebsamen Park Road
DEVELOPER:
Anthony Michael
1701 Rebsamen Park Road
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
Don Johnson
300 Spring Street, Suite 215
Little Rock, AR 72201
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: C-3 Permitted Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3 Permitted Uses
AREA: 0.30 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Waiver of the Master Street Plan requirements
to Rebsamen Park Road.
BACKGROUND:
On July 18, 2000, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,313 establishing a
Planned Commercial District titled Michael Short-form PCD located at 1701 Rebsamen
Park Road. As a part of the proposal the applicant was to construct a 500 square foot
kitchen facility and eliminate a mobile catering trailer from the site. The proposal also
included the addition of a paved driveway along the north side of the existing building
and a paved parking area to the rear of the building. The applicant proposed the
removal of the “head-in” parking in front of the building adjacent to Rebsamen Park
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6863-C
2
Road and to construct the road to Master Street Plan standard.
On May 9, 2002, the Planning Commission denied a request to revised a previously
approved PCD to more accurately reflect the current conditions of the site. The
applicant requested the “head-in” parking along Rebsamen Park Road not be eliminated
and the roadway not be constructed to Master Street Plan standard. The applicant also
requested the previously required landscaping in the rear of the building be eliminated.
The City Beautiful Commission denied this request.
As a part of the proposal the applicant requested the days and hours of operation be
changed from 11:00 am to 10:00 pm daily to not be set at any specific time. This
request was later modified to include the closing of the deck at 10:00 pm.
This request was appealed to the Board of Directors, which also denied the request at
their July 16, 2002, Public Hearing.
The applicant has not eliminated the “head-in” parking nor constructed Rebsamen Park
Road to Master Street Plan standard. The required rear landscaping strip also has not
been installed.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approved PCD to allow the site
to develop without the Master Street Plan requirement. The applicant has
indicated a pull-off/drop-off located within the right-of-way. The applicant has
indicated the area will be utilized by his catering business and has indicated the
drop-off is critical to the catering business.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing commercial building (cigar shop) on the site, as well as a
restaurant and a deck used for outdoor dining. There is a parking area in the
rear yard and head in parking along Rebsamen Park Road.
There are commercial uses immediately north and south of this property along
the east side of Rebsamen Park Road. There are also commercial uses
(including a parking lot) across Rebsamen Park Road to the west, with single-
family residences to the northwest. There is railroad right-of-way and a drainage
ditch immediately east of the property, with a mini-warehouse development
further east.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the neighborhood. All
property owners within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet of the site
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6863-C
3
who could be identified and the Capitol View, Hillcrest and Cedar Hill Terrace
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. All previous comments on this site apply.
2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct
one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the
planned development. Match existing improvements to the south.
3. The proposed driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access
and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Only the existing
driveway access is allowed.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: The utility pole and down guys in the landscaped area are to remain. Contact
SBC at 373-5112 for additional information.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to change in parking requirements.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights / Hillcrest Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant
has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial Development to
allow a circular drop-off within the required right-of-way.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6863-C
4
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: The plan submitted fails to provide for the minimum six (6) foot nine
(9) inch wide street buffer required. Additionally, no provision has been made for
the required minimum five (5) foot wide perimeter landscape strip south of the
parking area. These requirements take into account the reductions allowed
within the designated mature area.
The landscaping has not been installed along the northern perimeter that was
originally required.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Michael Anthony was present representing the request. Staff stated the
applicant was requesting waiver of the Master Street Plan requirements along
Rebsamen Park Road. Staff stated the applicant was requesting to install a
drop-off in the right-of-way, which did not meet ordinance requirements.
Mr. Anthony questioned the ordinances and requested additional information
concerning the ordinance requirements. Staff indicated he could obtain this
information from the City’s web page.
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 the requested additional information to staff after the
September 25, 2003, Subdivision Committee Meeting. The applicant has
indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the property. The applicant
has indicated his request is to be allowed a pull-off/drop-off located within the
right-of-way. The applicant has indicated this area will be utilized by his catering
business and has indicated this drop-off is critical to the catering business. Staff
is not supportive of the request.
Per City Code (City of Little Rock Code of Ordinances 31-210:) the required
driveway spacing is at a minimum of two hundred fifty feet centerline to centerline
or centerline to right-of-way of an intersecting collector street or street with a
higher classification. The minimum spacing from the property line shall be one
hundred twenty-five (125) feet. Maximum width of driveway is thirty-six (36) feet.
A lot is required six hundred twenty-five (625) feet of frontage for two (2) drives, if
the lot is adjacent to an intersecting collector street or street of a higher
classification. The applicant’s property is approximately 100-feet in width.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6863-C
5
For lots less than two hundred fifty (250) feet in width a property shared access is
recommended for proposed plats and existing plats recorded prior to January 1,
1999, are limited to one driveway and the driveway location shall be as approved
by the public works department and shall be considerate of adjacent lot access
or conflicting turn movements from properties across the street.
The applicant has indicated the southern entrance into the pull-off/drop-off at
eleven feet from the property line and the northern exit from the pull-off/drop-off
at 34-feet from the property line but only 14-feet from the applicant’s existing
drive accessing the rear parking area. With the limited frontage of the applicant’s
property the proposed placement of the entrance/exit to the pull-off/drop-off and
the existing driveway there is not sufficient frontage to meet the ordinance
criteria. Staff feels to place additional curb cuts is not prudent and feels the
street should be constructed to Master Street Plan standard. In addition staff
feels the Board of Directors has already made a decision based on their denial of
the applicant’s request to waive the Master Street Plan requirement at their July
16, 2002, Public Hearing. In staff’s opinion the applicant should be required to
construct Rebsamen Park Road to Master Street Plan standard to match the
existing construction to the south complete with curb, gutter, asphalt and
sidewalk.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Anthony Michael was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested an amendment to the
application filed. Staff stated the current request before the Commission was the hours
of operation proposed from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm daily. Staff stated the applicant had
indicated the required street improvements would be constructed to Rebsamen Park
Road as required by the Master Street Plan. Staff also stated the required landscaping
strip along the rear parking lot was not an issue the Commission could act upon and
would require action by the City Beautiful Commission. Staff noted the applicant would
be required to contact staff to file an application with the City Beautiful Commission prior
to the revision going before the Board of Directors.
There was a general discussion concerning the request previously to revise the PCD
and the hours of operation. Staff noted the concern previously was the noise level and
the music on the deck. Mr. Michael stated the establishment no longer provided music
on the deck.
A motion was made to approve the proposed request to allow the business to operate
from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm daily. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 noe and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-7482
NAME: Geyer Springs Church of Christ – Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION: 6004 West 53rd Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Geyer Springs Church of Christ/Carlos Bautista
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow use of a
portion of the church’s multipurpose building as a
dormitory for up to 10 young men who are attending a
bible institute (seminary). The property is zoned R-2.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the north side of West 53rd Street, just east of South
University Avenue.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The church itself has been a part of this neighborhood for many years.
The buildings were once home to classes of the Central Arkansas
Christian School. The intensely commercial University Avenue corridor is
adjacent to the west. A C-3 zoned apartment complex is adjacent to the
east. A mixture of R-2 zoned residential properties and C-3 zoned
commercial properties are located around the site. Allowing the use of a
portion of the existing building for a small dormitory use should not affect
the church’s compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Geyer Springs and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site contains a large parking lot that is mostly unused except on
worship service days. Additional parking is located on the south side of
West 53rd Street, around the church office building. It is anticipated that
some of the students will not drive but, even if all 10 occupants of the
proposed dormitory do drive, there is adequate parking on the site.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: No objection to addition of dormitory space.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
CATA: CATA bus routes are located along University Avenue, just west of
the site.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Geyer Springs Church of Christ is located on the R-2 zoned property at 6004
West 53rd Street. Church offices are located across West 53rd Street on
additional R-2 zoned property. The church campus consists of an office building
and parking lot on the south side of West 53rd Street; and a sanctuary-classroom
building, a two-story multipurpose building and additional parking on the north
side of West 53rd Street. The church once housed a campus of Central Arkansas
Christian School prior to the school relocating to a new campus in Maumelle.
The church’s multipurpose building is now mostly unused.
The church is associated with the Alpha and Omega Bible Institute. The Institute
trains young men of Spanish heritage as ministers. The Institute’s classes are
located at 6th and Izard, downtown. The church is proposing to use a part of its
multipurpose building to serve as a dormitory for 5 young men who are enrolled
at the Institute. That number may eventually expand to 10. These young men
are not married. The multipurpose building does have bathroom facilities and a
kitchen; a shower will be added. No rent will be collected from the students or
any other person or group during the time the young men live in the building.
Any money that changes hands will only be to cover up to, but not more than, the
cost of any utilities incurred.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482
3
Staff is supportive of the proposal. No changes are being made to the site, other
than for the changes to the interior of the multipurposes building. The proposed
use is compatible with uses and zoning in the area. Staff believes it is
appropriate to limit the dormitory use to no more than 10 students of the Alpha
and Omega Bible Institute, as proposed by the applicant.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance
with the following conditions:
1. Occupancy of the site is to be limited to no more than 10 students of the
Alpha and Omega Bible Institute. Occupancy is limited to the students only;
no other persons, including family members are permitted to occupy the site.
2. Compliance with building codes requirements for conversion of a portion of
this building into a residential occupancy.
3. There is to be no additional signage.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the applicant had failed to send the required notices and the
item needed to be deferred. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 4,
2003 Commission meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-7496
NAME: Lock and Load Business Center Short-form PCD
LOCATION: On the west side of the 10000 Block of Stagecoach Road
DEVELOPER:
Scott Garner
I-430 and Crystal Hill Road
North Little Rock, AR 72118
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 9.45 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial and Mini-warehouse development
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: The creation of a lot without public street
frontage.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone this 9.5-acre tract to PCD to allow the site to
develop with a commercial development and allow the creation of a two lots. Lot
1 will contain a 9600 square foot office/retail building with C-3, General
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7496
2
Commercial listed uses and the required parking. Lot 2 will be created as a lot
without public street frontage and access will be provided from Lot 1 in the way of
an ingress/egress/utility easement.
Lot 2 will develop with a mini-warehouse development in three phases. The
applicant is proposing Buildings 4 – 7 to develop in the first phase, Buildings 2, 3,
8 and 9 in the second Phase and Buildings 10 – 12 in the third and final phase.
The proposal includes a total of 172,500 square feet of storage. The applicant
has indicated an area for an office/ manager residence containing 2000 square
feet.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family home on a large tract. The area to the
east of the site is a non-conforming salvage yard and there is a large tract of C-2
zoned property to the northeast. The area to the north of the site contains a PD-
C for a mini-warehouse development and further north is the Harvest Foods
shopping center. The area north and west of the site zoned MF-24 has
developed as a retirement village with duplex housing. The area to the west of
the site is zoned MF-18 and developed with multi-family housing. West of the
site along Stagecoach Road is a vacant C-1 zoned site and a cemetery is located
further west.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and the Otter Creek
Homeowners Association along with all property owners 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.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The proposed right-of-way dedication and boundary street improvements
meet Master Street Plan requirements.
2. Driveway location does not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Normally, a driveway centered
on the property line would be required. If a shared 36' driveway is proposed,
it should be centered on the property boundary. Access easements should
be prepared and recorded by both property owners.
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7496
3
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
4. The plan does not address stormwater detention requirements for Lot 2.
Show the location of the proposed stormwater detention facilities for the 95%
impervious site.
5. Provide the storm water flows (Q) entering and leaving the property. The
proposed culvert must be sized in accordance with the Public Works
Drainage Manual. The design must not back water up onto adjacent
property, and provide a path of overflow for the 100 year design storm.
6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI and Public Works.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required
for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional
details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
required to serve the rear lot. Central Arkansas Water requests that a 15-foot-wide
utility easement be dedicated adjoining the west lot line of the front lot to allow for
the water main extension to serve the rear lot. If there are facilities that need to be
adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be
done at the expense of the developer. A Capital Investment Charge based on the
size of the connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. The
Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether
additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire
hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. 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: Contact the Little Rock Fire Department (Dennis Free) at 918-
3752 for additional information concerning access. Place fire hydrants per code.
County Planning: No comment received.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7496
4
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Community Shopping for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a general commercial
center and a mini-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. The
Office and Commercial Development goal listed an action statement of limiting
commercial and office development in the “heart” of the planning area to that
which primarily serves the neighborhood (C-1 uses) while attracting enough
business from other areas to be profitable. The plan defines the “heart” of the
study area as roughly between Crystal Valley Road and Otter Creek Road along
Stagecoach Road and being largely residential. The plan supports other more
intense uses to locate on the peripheral of the study area where interstate traffic
will support larger markets. The plan also lists action statements supporting the
use of Planned Zoning Districts to encourage neighborhood friendly
developments and strongly discourages the construction of large, warehouse
type facilities, in the heart of the study area.
Landscape: The proposed street buffer along Stagecoach Road fails to provide
the fifty (50) foot average width required. Additionally, that portion of the
proposed northern land use buffer adjacent to multi-family property is short of the
fifty (50) foot width requirement by twenty-five (25) 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, eastern and western perimeter where adjacent to residential properties.
Credit toward satisfying this requirement can be given for building walls that have
no windows or doors other than those required by ordinance.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape
plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the request
was to rezone a 9.5-acre tract from R-2 to PCD to allow the creation of a two-lot
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7496
5
plat and the development of Lot 1 with a strip retail center and the second lot with
mini-warehouse. Staff requested the applicant provide details concerning
signage, days and hours of operation and any proposed fencing. Staff also
requested the applicant provide details concerning building construction and roof
material and pitch. Staff suggested the applicant construct the development of
split face block and the roof of non-reflective materials.
Mr. White questioned the buffer requirement along the street and the northern
perimeter. Staff stated the site was being reviewed as a single development thus
necessitating a 50-foot buffer along the street. Staff stated if the site were
reviewed as two lots the street buffer would be a minimum of nine feet. Staff
stated this would not affect the northern buffer and the applicant could request a
reduced buffer area since the buildings would be used for screening.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the driveway location did
not meet access and circulation requirements. Staff requested the applicant
work with the adjacent property owner and secures a shared driveway location.
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 at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated the proposed signage will comply with signage allowed in
commercial zones or a maximum of thirty-six (36) feet in height and one hundred
sixty (160) square feet in area.
The applicant is proposing the development to be constructed with two (2) lots
with a strip retail center and mini-warehouse. The applicant is proposing the
construction of a 9,600 square foot retail center on Lot 1 and 172,500 square feet
of mini-warehouse on Lot 2. The mini-warehouse development will be
constructed in three (3) phases. The applicant is proposing the placement of a
2,000 square foot office/manager’s residents on Lot 2 as a part of the mini-
warehouse development.
The applicant proposes the mini-warehouse development to have twenty-four
(24) hour access while the retail center will operate from 6:00 am to 12:00 am
seven (7) days per week. Staff is supportive of the proposed hours of operation.
The applicant has indicated an on-site dumpster for the retail center. The
dumpster will be placed at the rear of the building and will be properly screened.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7496
6
The proposed development will result in the creation of a two (2)-lot plat. Lot 2 is
proposed to be developed as a lot without public street frontage. The proposed
configuration will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the
creation of the lot without public street frontage. The applicant has indicated an
ingress/egress/utility easement to access Lot 2. The applicant has also indicated
a cross access parking agreement between the two (2) lots. Staff is supportive
of the variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
The applicant has indicated there will be no outdoor storage of boats, RV’s, or
campers on the site. The applicant has indicated the rear of the mini-warehouse
buildings will be used as screening. The development will be constructed of split-
face block and a hip roof. The applicant is requesting a reduced landscape
buffer along the northern property line. The applicant has indicated a 30-foot
buffer reducing to a 25-foot buffer. The typical minimum required buffer in this
area would be 50-feet. Staff would recommend the buffer maintain a 30-foot
constant distance from the property line.
The applicant has indicated the rear of the buildings will be used as screening.
The buildings will be constructed of split face block and the roof is to be
constructed of a non-reflective material. The applicant has also indicated a
hipped roof to allow the development to appear more aesthetically pleasing. In
areas where fencing is required, the applicant has indicated an eight (8) foot
wood fence. The proposed fence height is consistent with fencing allowed in
commercial zones.
The applicant has indicated a total of 33 parking spaces within the development.
The proposed retail building to be constructed on Lot 1 is 9,600 square feet.
Based on the typical minimum parking requirement for commercial property the
applicant would be required 33 parking spaces. The applicant has requested
C-3, General Commercial listed uses be allowable uses for Lot 1. Should a
restaurant locate on the site staff would question if there is adequate parking.
Staff would recommend potential users be limited by the available parking.
The applicant has indicated a pass-through gate for potential customers of the
mini-warehouse. Staff feels although the proposed parking (33 spaces) would
typically be required to meet the parking demand of the retail center staff feels
there will be sufficient parking to meet the needs of both developments. There
are twenty-eight (28) parking spaces proposed in front of the building and five (5)
spaces proposed in the rear of the building. Staff feels the rear five (5) spaces
will serve both developments. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking
indicated on the site plan.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7496
7
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 PCD to
allow the creation of a two (2)-lot plat and the development of the site with a strip
retail center on Lot 1 and a mini-warehouse development on Lot 2.
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 combination of uses of Lot 1 not exceed the typical
minimum parking requirement established in the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated they felt the proposed use appropriate for the site. 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.
Staff also presented a recommendation the combination of uses of Lot 1 not exceed the
typical minimum parking requirement established in the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff recommended approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision Ordinance
to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-7497
NAME: Mehaffy Short-form PD-O
LOCATION: 5401 Pinnacle Valley Road
DEVELOPER:
Laura Mehaffy
1900 Foreman Drive
Little Rock, AR 72227
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 3.57 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O
PROPOSED USE: Veterinarian Clinic
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the minimum driveway spacing
requirement.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to develop this 3.57-acre tract with a single 5,000 square
foot veterinarian clinic. The applicant has indicated the initial construction will
start small, 3,000 square feet, leaving room for expansion in the future. The
proposed site plan does not include any outdoor runs or kennels and the
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7497
2
applicant has indicated animals will not be let out without supervision. The
applicant has indicated all kennels will be fully enclosed and boarding will be
primarily for patients.
The applicant is proposing a six-foot privacy fence in the rear yard area to assist
in the control of noise from the site. The applicant has also indicated noise will
be controlled with acoustical ceilings on the inside. The applicant has indicated
odor can be easily controlled with thorough cleaning and proper ventilation. The
applicant has also indicated these items can be controlled by the allowance of a
buffer zone on the east and west sides of the property. The applicant has also
indicated the dumpster will be located on the western side behind the building to
allow the greatest distance between the existing single-family homes.
The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm
Monday through Friday and 8:00 am to 12:00 pm on Saturday. The applicant
has indicated there will be limited visits to the site after these hours; only to check
on patients when needed. The applicant anticipates hiring one staff person
initially with the addition of up to five employees in the future.
The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed of materials that will
compliment the area. The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed
with a gable roof in a residential style that would fit in with the context of the
neighborhood and property. The applicant has stated the building construction
will not be a metal building.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is more deep than it is wide and contains an existing single-family home.
The front of the tract contains a scattering of trees while the rear of the site is
somewhat steep and is tree covered. There is a single-family subdivision located
to the east of the site with a vacant wooded area located to the north and west.
The area across Pinnacle Valley Road contains a single-family home adjacent to
a creek. There are non-residential uses located along Cantrell Road in near
proximity to this site. The homes located along Pinnacle Valley Road are
somewhat scattered with homes located on acreage.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Secluded Hills Property Owners Association and the Westbury
Neighborhood Association, 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.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7497
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Pinnacle Valley Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required.
2. Design plans for widening and improving Pinnacle Valley have been
prepared.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affect.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: A 10-foot utility easement is required along the perimeter of the site. Contact
SBC at 373-5112 for additional details.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional water
service is needed. 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. Contact Carroll Keatts, Central Arkansas Water's Cross Connection
Program Administrator at 992-2431, if you would like to discuss backflow
prevention requirements for this project.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional information.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Development - Office for a veterinary clinic.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7497
4
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable
Natural Environment goal listed an action statement of preserving the Highway
10 Design Overlay District.
Landscape: Areas set-aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
eastern and western perimeters. Screening requirements along the northern
perimeter appear to be satisfied with the existing large on-site wooded area.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the request
was to rezone the site from R-2 to PD-O to allow a veterinarian clinic to locate on
the site. Staff stated the applicant was not requesting any outdoor runs or
kennels as a part of the development. Staff requested the applicant provide an
elevation of the proposed building complete with construction materials.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated there were issues related
to the driveway location that were not mentioned in the write-up. Staff stated the
applicant should relocate the drive to the center of the property away from the
property line. The applicant indicated the side location was the most desirable to
allow for potential future development of the property locate to the north. Staff
suggested the applicant consider designing the drive to be in the center and still
allow for the future access.
There were questions concerning the timing and the street construction. Staff
stated if the applicant “pulled” a building permit prior to the opening of bids for the
construction of Pinnacle Valley Road then the applicant would be required to
construct one-half street improvements. Staff stated an in-lieu contribution would
possible be accepted.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the areas set aside for
buffers appeared to meet with ordinance requirements. Staff stated screening
would be required along the east and west property lines. Staff stated screening
could be accomplished through dense evergreen plantings.
There was no further discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item to the
full Commission for final action.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7497
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated all building setback dimensions, areas set aside for
buffers and landscaping and the proposed screening. The applicant has
indicated screening will be provided along the eastern and western perimeters.
The applicant has indicated signage will comply with signage allowed in office
zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff
is supportive of the proposed screening and signage.
The applicant has relocated the drive away from the property line. The proposed
driveway will require a waiver of ordinance requirements to allow the reduced
driveway spacing (criteria - 150-feet from the property line). Staff is supportive of
the request. The site has some constraints related to the property frontage; a
large drainage easement and the proposed realignment of Pinnacle Valley Road.
The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way will be made to the city
as requested (55-feet from centerline). The applicant is requesting an in-lieu
contribution for street construction. Staff is supportive of the requested in-lieu
contribution.
The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed of materials that will
compliment to the area. The applicant has indicated the building will be
constructed with a gable roof in a residential style that would fit in with the
context of the neighborhood and property. The applicant proposes the building
will be constructed of siding and brick veneer with a shingled roof. Staff is
supportive of the proposed building materials and design.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to rezone the site PD-O to
allow a veterinarian clinic to locate on the site.
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 approval of the requested in-lieu contribution for street
construction.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow reduced driveway spacing.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7497
6
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated to their knowledge
there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed 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.
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested in-lieu contribution
for street construction and a recommendation of approval of the request to allow
reduced driveway spacing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: LU03-08-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City Planning District
Location: 1858 S. Chester St.
Request: Single Family to Mixed Use
Source: David Featherstone
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District from Single Family to
Mixed Use. The Mixed Use category provides for a mixture of residential, office, and
commercial uses to occur. A Planned Zoning District is required if the use is entirely
office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three. The applicant wishes to
operate a cleaning service at this location.
Prompted by this Land Use Plan amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the
area of review to include the west side of Chester Street from the area currently shown
as Mixed Use to 19th Street. This change would eliminate the Single Family shown on
west side of the 1800 block of Chester Street from Wright Avenue to 19th Street.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is two houses and a vacant lot currently zoned R-4 Two Family and is .517
acres ± in size. The expanded area consists of the applicant’s properties and a vacant
lot zone R-4. The property north of the expanded area is zoned O-1 Quiet Office for a
college community center operated by Philander Smith College. The east side of the
1800 block of Chester Street south of the auto shop consists of houses zoned R-2.
Rightsell Elementary School is located on the east side of the 1900 block of Chester
Street. The remainder of the area surrounding the expanded application area consists
of houses and vacant property zoned R-4.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On March 19, 2003 multiple changes were made from Single Family, Mixed Office
Commercial, Public Institutional and Mixed Use to Public Institutional and Multi-family in
the vicinity of the Arkansas Children’s Hospital about ½ mile northwest of the applicant’s
property to accommodate proposed development and to recognize existing conditions.
On January 4, 2000 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use at 2311 S.
Spring Street to accommodate proposed development about ½ mile east of the
application area.
On June 15, 1999 multiple changes were made from Single Family to Mixed Use and
Public Institutional on Wright Avenue at Park and Howard Streets to recognize existing
conditions and accommodate proposed development about 1 mile west of the study
area.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-01
2
On April 20, 1999 multiple changes were made from Commercial, Low Density
Residential, and Public Institutional to Mixed Use on Scott Street from 16th Street to
I-630 to recognize existing conditions about ¾ mile northeast of the expanded area.
On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Commercial on Scott
Street from 17th to 19th Street to recognize existing conditions located about 7/10 of a
mile south of the expanded study area.
On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Multi-family to Low Density Residential on
13th to 15th Street to recognize existing conditions located about 1/3 of a mile northeast
of the amendment area.
The applicant’s property and the expanded area are shown as Single Family on the
Future Land Use Plan. The property to the north is shown as Mixed Use while the
remainder of the surrounding properties are shown as Single Family, while Public
Institutional is shown to the southeast for the school.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Chester Street is shown as a Minor Arterial with a modified standard of a 60’ Right-of-
Way, a four-lane cross-section, and additional requirements at intersections. Chester
Street is built to the modified standard. A Class III Bikeway is shown on Chester Street
from 14th to Roosevelt. There is no additional Right-of-Way or paving required for a
Class III Bikeway.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 includes public school
property, such as the Rightsell Elementary School located in the 1900 block on the east
side of Chester Street and Dunbar Magnet Jr. High at the corner of Cross Street and
Wright Avenue as an element in the eight-block strategy of providing park and open
space facilities within eight blocks of all residents of the City of Little Rock.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Downtown Neighborhoods Plan
for the Future Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan does not contain any goals,
objectives, or action statements relative to this case. However, the Executive Summary
of the plan goals did list a priority of rehabilitating decayed structures and overgrown
vacant lots for residential and commercial uses. The Executive Summary also supports
increasing home ownership rates in the area and improving protections for historic
structures.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-01
3
ANALYSIS:
The applicant’s property is located in a neighborhood where most of the non-residential
uses are institutional in nature. A change to Mixed Use would expand the area shown
as Mixed Use from its current location down to 19th Street. A change to Mixed Use
would allow the non-residential uses to extend to the south along the west side of
Chester but could protect the integrity of neighboring uses through the Planned Zoning
Development process required for non-residential uses. Currently, most of the
properties along Chester Street south of Wright Avenue present a residential character.
All of the property located in the expanded area along Chester Street front the street
and are accessed primarily from Chester Street. The houses located to the east face
Chester Street, and would face any potential non-residential development within the
expanded study area. The houses on Chester Street located south of 19th Street face
Rightsell Elementary School and would not be directly effected by non-residential
development north of 19th Street as long as 19th Street is established as the southern
boundary for the area shown as Mixed Use.
Another potential for conflicting uses would be at the northwest corner of the Chester
and 19th Street intersection. A change to Mixed Use at the northwest corner of Chester
and 19th opens the potential for development of a non-residential use near the school.
Any PZD approved for non-residential uses on the north side of the Chester / 19th
intersection would need to be implemented in a way that would protect the integrity of
the uses located to the south.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Community Outreach
Neighborhood Organization, Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association, Central High
Neighborhood Association, East of Broadway Neighborhood Association, Meadowbrook
Neighborhood Association, MLK Neighborhood Association, Quapaw Quarter
Neighborhood Crime Watch Assoc., South End Neighborhood Association, South End
Neighborhood Developers, and Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association. Staff has
received no comments from area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
The applicant has requested a deferral of six weeks on this item. Staff supports this
request for deferral.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-01
4
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the December 4, 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.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 16.1 FILE NO.: Z-7498
NAME: Featherstone Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: 1858 Chester Street
DEVELOPER:
David Featherstone
1858 South Chester Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
Laha Engineers
P.O. Box 190251
Little Rock, AR 72219
AREA: 0.516 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-4, Two-family residential
ALLOWED USES: Residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Mr. Klean’s Carpet and Janitorial Service
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant has requested this item be deferred to the December 4, 2003 Public
Hearing to allow additional time to resolve any outstanding issues. Staff is supportive of
this request.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7498
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the December 4, 2003,
Public Hearing to allow additional time to resolve any outstanding issues. Staff
presented a recommendation of approval of the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-7499
NAME: Garcia Short-form PD-R
LOCATION: 17114 Devin Read Lane
DEVELOPER:
Pablo Garcia Campos
17114 Devin Read Lane
Little Rock, AR 72210
ENGINEER:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 8.78 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: Three single-family residences on one tract; one site built and two
single-wide manufactured
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The site currently contains three homes. The applicant has recently placed two
manufactured homes on this 8.78-acre tract of land along with a stick built home.
The new homes will be accessed by a shared driveway from Devin Read Lane.
The applicant is requesting a rezoning to PD-R to allow the uses to become
conforming.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7499
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing site built single-family home and two manufactured
homes. The homes have been placed along the western property line with a
single driveway accessing both homes. There is large pond located near the
entrance to the applicant’s property and Devin Read Lane ends at the applicant’s
property line. The area to the south of the site is vacant and wooded with single-
family homes located along Shaner Circle both site built and manufactured. The
area to the north and east of the site is vacant and tree covered. There appears
to be a driveway located at Devin Read Lane extending to the east. Staff is
unsure if a home is located at the end of the drive.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, all residents located within 300-feet of
the site who could be identified and all owners of property located within 200-feet
of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing, staff has
received one informational phone call from an area resident.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition
to normal charges. A water main will be required in order to provide water service
to this property. The Fire Department having jurisdiction needs to evaluate this
site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be
required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense. This development will have minor impact on existing water
distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7499
3
pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for
additional details.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Crystal Valley Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Development - Residential for a new house and two
manufactured homes.
The residential density proposed is consistent with single-family density.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: No comment received.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was to allow the
placement of three homes on a single tract of land. Staff noted the request was
the result of an enforcement action. Staff noted they would contact the applicant
and resolve any outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. There
being no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to
the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant has placed two manufactured homes on the site in addition to an
existing stick built home. All the homes have separate septic systems in place.
The applicant has submitted approval of the existing septic system located on the
site from the Arkansas Department of Health. (There were previously two homes
located on the site where the manufactured homes were placed. The applicant
connected the two new homes to the existing tanks.)
The site is accessed by a drive from Devin Read Lane. Currently Devin Read
Lane ends at the applicant’s property although the survey indicates right-of-way
is in place to extend the road to the north along the applicant’s eastern property
line.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7499
4
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The site contains 8+ acres and would result in a density of
2.66 units per acre. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request and the style of
housing is not inconsistent with homes in the area. Along Shaner Circle there is
a mixture of stick built homes and manufactured homes. Staff is supportive of
the request to rezone the site PD-R to allow the existing three homes to remain
on the site.
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: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Ms. Alison Garcia was present representing the request. Staff noted the site was
located outside the City Limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction.
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.
Mr. Jason Redditt was a registered objector but was not present at the time the item
was hear. Mr. Velez read a statement of opposition to the proposed request into the
record.
Mr. Sam Velez addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He
stated his property boarded the Garcia property to the west and his primary concern
was screening. He also questioned if the applicant was willing to limit the occupancy to
family members only.
Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, questioned Ms. Garcia if she
would commit to not clearing of any trees along the western property line. Ms. Garcia
stated this was not an issue and was more than willing to the stipulation to not be
allowed to clear the western property line. Ms. Garcia stated the homes were sitting
near where two previous homes stood. She stated the old homes were demolished
prior to moving the manufactured homes on the site.
Mr. Lawson also asked Ms. Garcia if she was willing to limit the occupancy to family
members. She stated this was an acceptable condition.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7499
5
There was a general discussion concerning the screening along the western perimeter.
Commission Rector suggested the applicant work with Mr. Velez prior to the item being
considered by the Board of Directors to resolve any concerns.
A motion was made to approve the request as amended to include limiting the
occupancy of the units to family members and not clear the existing vegetation along
the western property line. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and
1 abstain.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: LU03-01-06
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: Highway 10 north of Jerry Drive
Request: Transition to Commercial
Source: John Rees, Rees Development Co.
The applicant has petitioned to withdraw this item on September 25, 2003. Staff
recommends placing this item on consent for withdrawal without prejudice.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was made to
approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 18.1 FILE NO.: Z-7500
NAME: Rees Short-form PCD
LOCATION: on the north side of Cantrell Road, east of Taylor Loop
DEVELOPER:
John Rees – Rees Development Company
12115 Hinson Road
Little Rock, AR 72212
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 1.70 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: C-3, General Commercial District uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant has requested this item be withdrawn from consideration without
prejudice. Staff is supportive of this request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no objectors
present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be withdrawn from
consideration without prejudice. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the
request.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7500
2
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2
absent.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: LU03-11-04
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-430 Planning District
Location: 3204 Old Shackleford Road
Request: Mixed Office Commercial to Service Trades District
Source: Joe White, White - Daters
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the I-430 Planning District from Mixed Office Commercial
to Service Trades District. The Service Trades District category provides for a selection
of office, warehousing, and industrial park activities that primarily serve other office or
industrial businesses. The district is intended to allow support services to these
businesses and to provide for uses with an office component. A Planned Zoning District
is required for any development not wholly office.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area
of review to include an area shown as Mixed Office Commercial along both sides of Old
Shackleford Road from the Old Shackleford / Shackleford Road intersection to W. 36th
Street and the western side of Shackleford Road south of the intersection listed above.
This expansion would allow enough land to be shown as STD to make office,
warehousing, and industrial park activities viable.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property consists of a vacant office and a metal building currently zoned Planned
Commercial Development and is 1.30 acres ± in size. The expanded study area is
largely vacant land with a few house built along Shackelford Road zoned R-2 Single
Family. A non-conforming motor repair shop is located in the expanded study area
about half way between Shackleford Road and W. 36th Street. A vacant Planned
Residential Development, for an adult group home, is located in the expanded area on
W. 36th Street just west of the intersection with Old Shackleford. The east side of Old
Shackleford consists of a lock smith shop zoned PCD and houses built on large lots
zoned R-2. Further to the east fronting Shackleford Road, are a strip commercial center
zoned PCD, a pollution management company zoned C-4 Open Display Commercial,
and vacant land zoned C-3 General Commercial. A piece of property at the intersection
of W. 36th Street and Old Pine Road is vacant land zoned C-2 Shopping Center.
The property to the north is a undeveloped PCD and a vacant area zoned MF-12 Multi-
family at the northeast corner of the Old Shackleford / Shackleford Road intersection.
The east side of Shackleford Road is a large tract of land zoned O-3 General Office.
The land south of the Old Shackleford and W. 36th intersection is zoned R-2 with a
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-11-04
2
C.U.P. for a manufactured home. The land south of W. 36th Street is zoned R-2 Single
Family with a large vacant building. A large vacant tract of land zoned R-2 sits to the
west of the expanded study area.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On February 4, 2003, a change was made from Multi-family to Mixed Office Commercial
about ½ mile southwest of the applicant’s property at the southwest corner of I-430 and
W. 36th Street to accommodate future development.
On November 4, 2002, a change was made from Single Family to Low Density
Residential a little less than 1 mile to the east of the expanded area along Lehigh Court
to recognize existing conditions.
On September 4, 2001, a change was made from Park / Open Space to Multi-family
east of W. 24th Street and Junior Deputy Road about ¾ of a mile northeast of the
applicant’s property to accommodate proposed development.
On January 16, 2001, changes were made from Mixed Use and Suburban Office to
Commercial and Office on the southeast corner of I-430 and Col. Glenn Road about 1
mile south of the application area to accommodate proposed development resulting in
the current land uses shown for that location.
The applicant’s property and the expanded area are shown as Mixed Office Commercial
on the Future Land Use Plan. The land to the north of the expanded area is shown as
Mixed Office Commercial while the land to the east is shown as Office. The southeast
corner of the Shackleford / W. 36th intersection is shown as Multifamily, while the
southwest corner of the intersection is shown as Low Density Residential. The land to
the south is shown as Park / Open Space. The land west of the expanded study area is
shown as Mixed Office Commercial.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Old Shackleford Road is a local street paved as a rural two-lane road with open
drainage. Development of the applicant’s property would require half street
improvements to Minor Commercial Collector standards. Both Shackleford Road and
W. 36th Street are shown as Minor Arterials and are built as rural two-lane roads. I-430
is shown as a Freeway. Shackleford Road would require half street improvements to
Minor Arterial standards. W. 36th Street would require half street improvements to the
modified standard of 3 lanes with a 70’ Right-of-Way. There are no bikeways shown
that would be affected by this amendment.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows a Potential Greenbelt
for the land along the floodways of Panther Branch and Brodie Creek. The designation
of Potential Greenbelts along the floodways of streams is intended to not only preserve
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-11-04
3
the watersheds of the streams, but also allow the future development of park amenities,
and or the preservation of open space amenities. Any future development of the
property within the study area should be designed in a sensitive manner to protect the
nearby streams.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock
recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
The expanded study area is part of a large tract of land shown as MOC that has
remained largely undeveloped. MOC uses have expanded to the southwest along the
north side of Col. Glenn Road within the past five years, the existing uses of property
within the study area has not changed. Most of the property along Old Shackleford has
remained residential while the properties fronting Shackleford have developed for non-
residential uses. A change to STD might allow new development to take place that
would be close enough to minor arterial streets to be practical and yet isolated enough
to provide a buffer to the more intense uses that could occur in an area shown as STD.
An area shown as STD would decrease the area shown as MOC. In addition, a change
to STD would allow for some industrial uses to occur with a mixture of office uses
governed by the use of Planned Zoning Districts. The PZD process would allow the
implementation of design standards that could help preserve the semi-rural character of
the area and protect the integrity of neighboring uses. The design review process of
PZDs in an area shown as STD could also allow the environmental evaluation of future
developments with the goal of protecting the neighboring streams.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: John Barrow
Neighborhood Association, Campus Place Property Owners Association, Kensington
Place Property Owners Association, Pennbrook/Clover Hill Property Owners
Association, Sandpiper Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "A" Neighborhood
Association, Twin Lakes "B" Special Improvement District, Twin Lakes “B” Prop.
Owners Association, and Westbrook Neighborhood Association. Staff has received
three comments from area residents of which all were neutral.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-11-04
4
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate. A change to STD would provide land for uses
to develop that could provide service support to other uses located in the area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. During the consent agenda,
it was noted that an email of opposition was received, but the objector was not present.
A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of
8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 19.1 FILE NO.: Z-5959-B
NAME: Ross Spark’s Office Development Revised Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: 3204 Old Shackleford Road
DEVELOPER:
Ross Spark’s Builders
P.O. Box 17108
Little Rock, AR 72222
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.3 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-C
ALLOWED USES: Office-warehouse
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Contractors Storage Yard
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On May 2, 1995, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 16,879 and 16,880.
Ordinance No. 16,879 rezoned the property to PD-C for an office-warehouse, with C-3
permitted uses as alternative uses for the site. Ordinance No. 16,880 granted a deferral
of street improvements to Old Shackleford Road for five (5) years or until other
construction along Old Shackleford Road.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5959-B
2
The approved site plan for the property included a paved and landscaped parking area.
The area was not developed and a permanent Certificate of Occupancy was also never
issued.
The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,520 on July 3, 2001, approving a
revision to the existing Planned Commercial Development to allow Cook Restoration to
locate on the site. The request included a five-year deferral of street improvements to
Old Shackleford Road and a two-year deferral of the hard surface parking area on the
site. The applicant indicated any required landscaping upgrades would be made to the
site. The site work has not been completed.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting a revision to a previously approved single use
planned development to allow the current owner to expand the facilities and
utilize the site as a contractor’s office with outdoor storage of equipment.
The applicant has indicated in Phase I there will be two additions to the main
structure, street improvements to collector standards, a paved 19 space parking
area for the office and a fenced area in the rear of the project for equipment
storage. The equipment storage area is proposed with a 6-inch of gravel spread
to eliminate dust and mud. The area would be used for equipment and material
storage. Phase II will consist of a 40-foot by 60-foot expansion to the existing
metal building.
Phase III includes the construction of a 50-foot by 70-foot free standing building
to be used as lease space with general and professional office uses requested
as the potential uses. The structure is located at the rear of the property. The
parking area will be expanded during this phase with the addition of 24 parking
spaces. With this addition the contractor’s equipment storage area will be
reduced.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There are two (2) existing buildings on the site, a 1727 square foot office and a
2400 square foot warehouse structure. There is a gravel parking area along the
building’s south side.
There are commercial uses across Old Shackleford Road to the east and
southeast, with undeveloped property to the north (Summit Mall PCD) and west
(R-2). There are several single-family residences and an auto repair business to
the south, between this property and West 36th Street.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5959-B
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning
the proposed development. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association, all
residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified and all
property owners located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public
hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The proposed right-of-way dedication and boundary street improvements
meet Master Street Plan requirements.
2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading,
drainage and plans for work in the right-of-way will need to be submitted and
approved prior to the start of construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: A sewer main extension will be required, with easements, if service is
required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for
additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional water service
is required. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine
whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required, especially
with Phases 2 and 3. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they 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 protection. 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.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5959-B
4
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for contractor's office with a
contractor’s storage yard.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Commercial Industrial is a
separate item on this agenda. (LU03-11-04 – Item #19)
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 Phase I parking lot does not provide for the eight (8)
percent (582 square feet) of required landscaping within the interior of the
parking lot. Interior islands must be at least 150 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet
in width to count toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements. The
proposed Phase III parking lot is 333 square feet less than the 733 square feet of
interior landscaping required.
A portion of the proposed street buffer drops below the 11-½ foot width minimum.
The full requirement being 23 feet in width. Additionally, the western perimeter
does not provide for the 23-foot wide land use buffer. Additionally, a portion of
the southern perimeter does allow for the minimum nine (9) foot wide land use
buffer.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 25, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the request
was to amend a previously approved planned development to allow a
contractor’s office and storage yard to locate on the site. Staff stated there were
additional items needed to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant
furnish details concerning signage, days and hours of operation and dumpster
location.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5959-B
5
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed right-of-way
dedications were adequate to meet the Master Street Plan requirement. Staff
noted the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the site and a grading
permit would be required prior to any development.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff requested additional interior
landscaping and an increase in a portion of the proposed street buffer. Staff
stated the southern perimeter did not allow for the minimum nine-foot wide buffer.
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 at the September 25, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated all building setback dimensions and has indicated the
signage will comply with signage allowed in office zones (six feet in height and
sixty-four square feet in area). The applicant has also indicated the days and
hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm daily. Staff is supportive of
the proposed signage and the proposed hours of operation.
The applicant has indicated the development will take place in three (3) phases
with the bulk of the construction in Phase I being the construction of a hard
surface parking area (19 spaces), the required street improvements and two
additions to the existing building. The applicant is proposing the construction of a
400 square feet addition to connect the existing structure with an existing metal
building and a 900 square foot addition to the south of the building. With the
expansion the site will contain 5088 square feet of gross floor area. This would
typically require 12 parking spaces. The proposed parking is sufficient to meet
the parking demand of Phase I. The proposed Phase II addition would add an
additional 2400 square feet of gross floor area and bringing the typical minimum
parking requirement to 18 spaces.
The applicant has indicated a third phase, which would add a 3500 square foot
building on the site and the addition of 24 parking spaces. The typical minimum
parking demand would be 8 spaces. The applicant has indicated general and
professional office uses as the proposed uses for the building. Staff is supportive
of the proposed building construction and the proposed parking and placement.
The applicant has indicated locations for storage of equipment on the site plan.
The site plan indicates this area to be graveled. The area for storage is
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5959-B
6
decreased when the second building is added. The areas set aside are located
in the rear of the site adjacent to wooded areas. Staff feels the placement of
equipment in this area should have minimal impact on the surrounding area.
The applicant has indicated the minimum 11-½ foot street buffer and increased
the buffer area along the western perimeter to 25-feet. The applicant has also
indicated the minimum land use buffer along the south property line of 9 feet.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the
property.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to revised the previously
approved PCD to allow a contractors storage yard to become an allowable use
for the site.
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: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
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 item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent
and 1 recuse.
October 16, 2003
ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-7327-A
NAME: Shear Magic Revised Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: 1911 West 2nd Street
DEVELOPER:
Candy Hood
1911 West 2nd Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
ENGINEER:
Ollen Dee Wilson
P.O. Box 604
North Little Rock, AR 72115
AREA: 0.13 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PD-C
ALLOWED USES: Mixture of Commercial (Beauty Shop) and Residential Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Mixture of Commercial (Beauty Shop and Massage Therapy Clinic)
and Residential uses.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant has requested this item be withdrawn from consideration without
prejudice. Staff is supportive of this request.
October 16, 2003
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7327-A
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 16, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant had requested this item be withdrawn from consideration without
prejudice. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.