The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutpc_12 04 2003sub LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD DECEMBER 4, 2003 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eleven (11) in number. II. Members Present: Pam Adcock Fred Allen, Jr. Gary Langlais Jerry Meyer Chauncey Taylor Darwin Williams Bob Lowry Robert Stebbins Norm Floyd Mizan Rahman Bill Rector Members Absent: None City Attorney: Cindy Dawson III. Approval of the Minutes of the October 16, 2003 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA DECEMBER 4, 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 Street, south of I-440. G. Geyer Springs Church of Christ Conditional Use Permit (Z-7482), located at 6004 West 53rd Street. H. 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. H.1. Featherstone Short-form PD-C (Z-7498), located at 1858 Chester Street. I. Dyke Annexation – 368 Acre Annexation between Crystal Valley and David O Dodd Roads west of I-430 J. Nunn Day Care Center (Z-7477) – Conditional Use Permit, located at 19 Warren Drive K. Bank of Little Rock – Appeal of Land Alteration Ordinance Requirements, located at 15901 Cantrell Road Agenda, Page Two II. NEW ITEMS: 1. Central Arkansas Water (Project 1369) – Water Main Extension (G-40-23), along Rahling Road, Taylor Loop Creek and Cantrell Road. 2. Woodlands Edge Preliminary Plat (S-1313-E), located near Sweet Grass Drive and Woodlands Trail. 3. Chenal Parkway – Highway 10 Commercial Preliminary Plat (S-1405), located on the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. 4. Assembly of God Preliminary Plat (S-1406), located on the northeast corner of the I-30 Frontage Road and Sibley Hole Road. 5. Oxford Pointe Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-1407), located on West 57th Street, 2 Blocks East of Geyer Springs Road. 6. Shackleford Farms Preliminary Plat (S-1408), located along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway and south of Champlin Drive. 6.1 A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-19-02) in the Chenal Planning District along the east side of Kirk Road between Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road from Single Family, Low Density Residential, Multifamily and Office to Commercial, Multifamily and Office. 6.2 A Master Street Plan Amendment (MSP03-04) to remove three collectors along the proposed Minor Arterial named Wellington Hills Road / Champlin Road between Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. 6.3 Rezoning from R-2/R-3/MF-6/O-2 to MF-18, O-2 to C-3, O-2 to O-3 and MF-18 to O-2 (Z-4807-E), located along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway and south of Champlin Drive. 7. Madison Valley Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-1409), located west of Montgomery Road, south of Taylor Loop Road. 8. Chenal Plaza Lot 1 Revised PCD (Z-3292-G), located on the southwest corner of West Markham Street and Atkins Road. 9. Baptist School of Nursing and Allied Health Zoning Site Plan Review (Z-3371-G), located at 11900 Colonel Glenn Road. 10. Chelsea Square Revised PRD (Z-3968-B), located at 2111 Hinson Road #1. Agenda, Page Three II. NEW ITEMS: (Cont.) 11. The Ranch - Tract F Revised PCD (Z-4343-N), located on the northeast corner of Ranch Drive and Chenonceau Boulevard. 12. Malmstrom Commercial Center Short-form PCD (Z-4712-A), located at 11619 Kanis Road. 13. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-18-03) in the Ellis Mountain Planning District on the south side of Chenal Parkway east of the Wellington Hills Road intersection from Suburban Office to Commercial. 13.1 Pinnacle Ford Long-form PCD (Z-4841-B), located south of Chenal Parkway, east of the Kanis Road intersection. 14. Seven Acres Business Park Revised POD (Z-5038-H), located on the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Seven Acres Drive. 15. Rezoning from C-3 (with restrictions) to C-3 (Z-5097-E), located at the southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. 16. Parkway Mazda Expansion Revised Short-form PCD (Z-5258-C), located at 12206 West Markham Street. 17. LaVergne Revised Short-form POD (Z-6237-A), located at 14104 Taylor Loop Road. 18. The Village at Rahling Road Revised Long-form PCD (Z-6323-I), located on Rahling Circle on Unrecorded Lot 8A. 19. Hilton Garden Inn Conditional Use Permit (Z-6828-B), located at Peachtree and Centerview Drives. 20. Bowman Office Showroom Warehouse Short-form PCD (Z-7434-A), located on the west side of South Bowman Road approximately 800 feet south of the Kanis Road Intersection. 21. Sol Alman Short-form PID (Z-7529), located at 1300 East 9th Street and right-of-way abandonment for a portion of Hanger Street from East 8th Street to East 9th Street. 22. Fox Ridge at Chenal Short-form PD-R (Z-7530), located on the northwest corner of Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal Parkway. Agenda, Page Four II. NEW ITEMS: (Cont.) 23. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-08-02) in the Central City Planning District on the south side of Roosevelt Road in the 200 and 300 block from Single Family to Mixed Use. 23.1 Griffin Short-form PCD (Z-7531), located at 2512 Center Street. 24. A Land Use Plan Amendment (LU03-09-04) in the I-630 Planning District in the 1100 block of Van Buren Street from Single Family to Office. 24.1 Faithland Properties Short-form POD (Z-7532), located at 1100 South Van Buren Street. 25. Trent Properties Short-form POD (Z-7534), located at 15800 Cantrell Road. 26. Parker Cadillac Body Shop Revised Short-form PCD (Z-3606-B), located at 11607 Rainwood Road. 27. My Little School Revised Short-form PD-O (Z-6926), located on the southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Norton Road. 28. Parker Cadillac Saturn Dealership Revised PCD Time Extension (Z-4470-C), located on the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Wellington Village Drive. 29. Capitol Hills Apartments Revised Long-Form PD-R (Z-6120-I), located at the southwest corner of Capitol Hill Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue. December 4, 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1385 2 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 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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 December 4, 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 December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had resolved all the outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff stated the applicant had received an approval letter of the proposed wastewater collection and treatment system and the proposed design had not change from the original submission. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated with the request. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1385 10 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 stated they were also supportive of the requested five (5) year deferral of the Master Street Plan requirements to Raines Road (1/2 street construction requirement) and the requested waiver to allow the internal streets to be maintained as private streets. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request to allow the paved walking trails to serve as an alternative pedestrian circulation system. Staff stated they also were supportive of the requested variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lots 12, 13 and 20. Staff presented a recommendation that 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. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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 property 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. December 4, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 2003) The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal without prejudice. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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). December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had contacted them requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff stated the applicant had indicated once all the issues related to the floodway and wastewater collection and treatment were resolved they would refile the request. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. STAFF UPDATE: Staff members from the Manager’s Office, City Attorney, Public Works and Planning Departments have met with the applicant and have reached an agreed to compromise. Auto-opening gates will be placed on both Otter Creek Blvd. and Wimbledon. Sensors will open the gate for all vehicles any day of the week, any time of day. Cameras will be removed from the right-of-way and the gate/information houses will remain on both streets. The gates will stay for a ten (10) year period with automatic renewals every five years thereafter. The City reserves the right to revoke the authority to have the gates. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) 6 This change will allow access to these public roads by all individuals, twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week. The gates will provide “traffic” calming by showing vehicles as they enter the Otter Creek Subdivision. The neighborhood may place cameras on their property to help increase security for the subdivision. Staff recommends this change to the entrances to the Otter Creek Subdivision. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the request to place gates at the front and back entrance to the Otter Creek Subdivision. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the gates as a “traffic” calming device by slowing vehicles as they enter the Otter Creek Subdivision. Staff stated the gates must provide twenty-four hour a day seven day a week access to all and within the right-of-way the city would allow the gate houses to remain however there were to be no cameras permitted in the public right-of-way. Staff stated the agreement would be for an initial ten year period with automatic renewals every five years. Staff stated the city had the right to revoke the authority to have the gates at any time. Commissioner Floyd stated he had concerns with the placement of gates on a street that carried a large volume of traffic from a subdivision. Commissioner Floyd stated the apartment complex, which was recently approved would also take access to their site behind the gate. He stated residents of the complex would be forced to travel around the subdivision to access their residents after midnight. Staff stated the gate were full access 24 hours per day and seven days per week. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 1 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 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: 51.31 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 165 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 to allow an increased depth to width ratio for Lots 3-6, 46, 47, 59, 85, 86, 123, and 163 – 165. 2. A variance from the minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 21, 55-57, 62 and 93. 3. A variance from the minimum lot depth for Lots 55-57 and Lot 62. 4. A variance from the lot area requirement for Lot 21, and Lots 38-39. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 2 5. A variance for the minimum lot width requirement for Lots 29 and 44. 6. A variance to allow double frontage lots for Lots 142 – 149. 7. A variance to allow a 25-foot platted building line adjacent to David O Dodd Road, a minor arterial. A. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to subdivide this 51.31 acre site into 165 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. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 3 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. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 4 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. 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 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 5 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 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 6 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. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 7 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. 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. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the access issue. The applicant has redesigned the site to include an additional 11.31 acres (a total of 51+ acres) and 42 lots (a total of 165 lots). The proposed plat indicates access from David O’ Dodd Road to the south of the previously proposed area. The new street Culzean View will have lots fronting onto the street with a few of the proposed lots requiring waivers and variances. Staff has revised the previously requested variances based on the proposed lot number. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow an increased depth to width ratio for Lots 3 - 6, 46, 47, 59, 85, 86, 123, and 163 - 165. Section 31-232 (b) of the City of Little Rock Code of Ordinances requires no residential lot to be more than three times as deep as if is wide, except lots approved under paragraph (g) or lots abutting a freeway, expressway or railroad line. The applicant is requesting these lots be allowed to develop at a rate more than three times the allowed. staff is supportive of this request. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 8 The majority of the proposed lots are corner lots which should have minimal to no impact on the adjoining properties. The applicant is also requesting a variance from the minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 21, 55 – 57, 62 and 93. The ordinance requires every R-2, zoned lot to have a minimum lot depth of 100-feet. The proposed lots do not meet this minimum requirement. Staff is supportive of the requested minimum lot depth for Lots 55 – 57 and Lot 62. Staff does not feel the proposed reduced lot depth will have a negative impact on adjoining properties. The applicant is requesting a variance from the lot area requirement for Lot 21, and Lots 38 – 39. The Subdivision Ordinance requires all R-2 zoned lots to be a minimum of 7,000 square feet. These proposed lots are less than the minimum allowed. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced minimum lot area. The applicant is requesting a variance for the minimum lot width requirement for Lots 29 and 44. The ordinance requires all lot widths to be a minimum of 60-feet. The proposed lots are less than allowed under the ordinance. Staff feels if these lots are developed with widths less than the minimum required there should be minimal impact on the adjoining properties. The proposed preliminary plat also includes the development of double frontage lots for Lots 142 – 149. The proposed lots will have a 10-foot restrictive access easement along the rear of these lots allowing the lots to be front loaded only. Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow double frontage lots for the specified lots. Staff feels with the restrictive access easement there will be little to no impact on the adjoining properties. The proposed preliminary plat indicates a 25-foot platted building line adjacent to David O’ Dodd Road. The typical minimum required building line adjacent to a minor arterial is 35-feet. To allow the reduced platted building line will also require a variance. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced corner lot width for several of the corner lots. Lots 38, 39, 87, 88, 93 and 94 are proposed as less than the required 75-feet minimum width. Staff recommends the applicant reduce the number of lots adjacent to these corner lots to allow for additional buildable area as well as to allow for the required lot width of a corner lot of 75-feet. The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed in two phases. The applicant is proposing 100 lots to be constructed in the first phase and 65 lots in the second phase. The first phase will take traffic from David O’ Dodd into the subdivision not accessing the existing subdivision located to the east. The second phase will connect the existing subdivision to the proposed Culzean Estates. Staff is supportive of the proposed phasing plan. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 9 Staff recommends approval of the requested preliminary plat. The proposed development is at a density of 3.23 units per acre within the allowed density of single- family development. Staff does not feel the requested variances will affect the overall area and should have minimal to no impact on adjoining properties. Staff recommends approval of the requested preliminary plat subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the following variances from the Subdivision Ordinance: 1. A variance to allow an increased depth to width ratio for Lots 3 - 6, 46, 47, 59, 85, 86, 123, and 163 - 165. 2. A variance from the minimum lot depth requirement for Lots 21, 55 – 57, 62 and 93. 3. A variance from the minimum lot depth for Lots 55 – 57 and Lot 62. 4. A variance from the lot area requirement for Lot 21, and Lots 38 – 39. 5. A variance for the minimum lot width requirement for Lots 29 and 44. 6. A variance to allow double frontage lots for Lots 142 – 149. 7. A variance to allow a 25-foot platted building line adjacent to David O’ Dodd Road, a minor arterial. Staff recommends the applicant reduce the number of lots adjacent to corner Lots 38, 39, 87, 88, 93 and 94 to allow for additional buildable area as well as to allow for the required lot width of a corner lot of 75-feet. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were several objectors present. Staff presented the item along with the requested Conditional Use Permit (Item #E) both with a recommendation of approval. Staff noted there were several requested variances related to the proposed preliminary plat. Staff indicated support for many and opposition of a few. Mr. Archie Biggs addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated the proposed lots were to small and should be increased to meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. He also stated there were concerns with the detention facilities for the newly added eleven acres. Mr. Biggs stated the forty acre site would utilize the existing pond for detention but there would also be a large amount of water leaving the eleven acre site that would also require detention. Mr. Biggs also stated traffic in the area was a concern. He stated an extra lane would be required to allow residents to turn-into the subdivision. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 10 Ms. Elizabeth Pheifer addressed the Commission on behalf of the Shady Brook Subdivision. She stated her concern was the recreational facility. She stated her desire was to allow the residents of Shady Brook the ability to utilize the recreational facility at a lesser charge. She stated the residents also would request a seat on the Board of the Property Owners Association to ensure equal treatment. She stated there had been verbal agreements but there were no official written commitments. Mr. Biggs addressed the Commission again stating he was also concerned with the recreational facility. He stated the neighborhood was concerned with the facility becoming a commercial facility. Staff stated the facility was to be used by residents of the new subdivision and the Shady Brook Subdivision and not as a commercial facility. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated her concern was that nineteen percent of the proposed lots were substandard. She stated one out of five of the proposed lots did not meet ordinance requirements. Ms. Bell also stated she had concerns with not requiring landscaping along two sides of the facility. Ms. Bell stated residents should be protected from the future activities at the facility. Mr. McGetrick stated a revision to the plat to ensure lot widths and lot areas was a possibility. He stated he was officially requesting a revision to the preliminary plat removing the variances for reduced lot widths, reduced lot area and the reduced platted building line along David O Dodd. He stated he was still requesting the variance to allow double frontage lots and the lot depth to width ratio. Mr. McGetrick stated the landscaping was not necessary. He stated the facility would abut an eight acre lake with a miniature golf course. He stated the lake would be surrounded with a walking trail and sidewalks. Mr. McGetrick stated detention for the eleven acres would be placed on a tract adjacent to David O Dodd Road. He stated the development would also increase the road width adjacent to the development to Master Street Plan standards. Mr. McGetrick stated a taper would be added to allow for traffic flow. There was a general discussion concerning the recreational facility and the potential users of the recreational facility. It was determined the residents of the Shady Brook Subdivision, the residents and owners of land in the Culzean Estates Subdivision and their guest. A question was asked if the lake would allow swimming. Mr. McGetrick stated the lake would be posted for no swimming. Mr. McGetrick also stated the recreational facility would be constructed in the second phase but the lake and walking trails would be constructed in the first phase. A question was raised to the current traffic volume of David O Dodd Road. Staff stated currently David O Dodd was handling six hundred cars per day. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1398 11 There was a general discussion concerning the lake and the required area for detention. Mr. McGetrick stated the lake did handle a larger detention basin but there was sufficient area for the subdivision’s detention as well as adjoining properties. He stated the lake would be cleared of silt which would allow for the fluctuation levels. A motion was made to approve the proposed preliminary plat as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 noe, 0 absent and 1 recuse (Commissioner Fred Allen). December 4, 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 December 4, 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. December 4, 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 December 4, 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. December 4, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) This item was discussed concurrently with Culzean Estates Preliminary Plat (S-1398). Patrick McGetrick was presented representing the application. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7473 6 conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. Acting Chairman Rahman asked that the opponents speak first. Archie Beggs, of 11453 David O Dodd Road, stated he would prefer larger lots and he wanted assurance that drainage issues would be addressed. Elizabeth Phifer, of 6105 Shadybrook Drive, stated the neighborhood was in support of the item if a neighborhood resident was given a position on the Culzean Estates Property Owners Association (POA) and if the fee structure of the POA was set up so that there was a separate fee to allow use of the recreation facility. During the ensuing discussion, it was determined that a Shadybrook resident could have a position on the Culzean Estates Board and that the fee structure could be set up as described by Mr. Phifer. Mr. Beggs reiterated his desire to see larger lots. He stated he was okay with the recreation area as long as it was not a commercial business; that it is only for residents of the two subdivisions. He stated he wanted a minimum lot width of 65 feet. In response to a question from Commissioner Williams, Mr. Beggs stated the 65-foot width was arrived at after polling the neighbors. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, interjected that the recreation area could not be a commercial use; that it could only be for the use of the subdivision residents and guests. Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, expressed concerns about the number of variances associated with the plat as well as the variance from the requirement to place screening on the north and west perimeters of the recreation area. In response to questions from Commissioner Adcock, Mike Hood of Public Works stated the applicant would have to widen David O Dodd Road at the new subdivision’s entrance. He stated the proposed new subdivision would not increase traffic on David O Dodd Road beyond what the street could handle. Commissioner Lowry stated use of the recreation area should include residents of Shadybrook and residents and property owners of Culzean Estates and their guests. Commissioner Rector stated the recreation area was not to be located out for commercial use. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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. December 4, 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 December 4, 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 December 4, 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. December 4, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not resolved the issues related to the floodway and recommended the item be withdrawn from consideration, without prejudice, and refiled once the issues related to the floodway were resolved. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: G 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. The Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association had voiced support for the item subject to compliance with the conditions proposed by staff. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: H 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-01 2 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. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-01 3 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. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-01 4 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. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 2003) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 29, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: H.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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H.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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had contacted them and was working to provide the additional information requested with regard to the site plan. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing to allow the applicant additional time to revise the proposed site plan. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: I FILE NO.: 299 NAME: Dyke Annexation REQUEST: Accept the annexation of 368± Acres LOCATION: West of I-430 between David O Dodd and Crystal Valley Roads SOURCE: The Hathaway Group agent for property owner GENERAL INFORMATION: • The County Judge approved the annexation on August 28, 2003. • The area requested for annexation currently is wooded with an 18.5+ acre lake in the northern section of the area. • There is only one owner, Dyke Industries, Inc. • The annexation request is to obtain City Services (sewer). • The Site in question is generally rectangular in shape. North-south it covers over a section and east-west it extents three-quarters of a section. Total area is approximately 368 acres. • No Islands would be created by this annexation. • Currently the property is zoned R-2 Single Family. The applicant has indicated that the future development will be residential. • The property owner has expressed a desire to develop the site. AGENCY COMMENTS: Public Safety: Fire: The Fire Department reports that the area is beyond the limits for driving distance from any existing station. To annex this property could cause a reduction in the City of Little Rock’s ISO rating, thus effecting the fire insurance rates of all those in the City. The Department can not recommend the annexation of this area. The closest stations are Station 14, 8121 Colonel Glenn Road (Asher Avenue) and Station 18, 11500 Mabelvale West Road. Each of these stations is over 4 driving miles from the area requested for annexation. In fact, Station 18 is almost five driving miles from the closest part of the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-299 2 Police: No comment received. The annexation area would be part of the southwest patrol area if annexed. More particularly the area would become part of Patrol District 90. If the patrol car for this district were to travel along Colonel Carl Miller Road (to the southwest) as well as the Crystal Valley Manor Subdivision (to the southeast), it would currently have to pass by the annexation area. Until development, there will only be 266 feet for street or street frontage in the annexation area. Infrastructure and Community Facilities: Central Arkansas Transit: No comment received. There is not a Bus route near the site of the proposed annexation. Two bus routes exist approximately 2 miles from the area. One (Route 14) is to the northeast, with the closest point the Colonel Glenn/Shackleford intersection. The second (Route 17) is to the southeast, with the closest point Southwest Hospital across I-430 and I-30 from the area. Parks & Recreation: No comment received. The 2001 Parks and Recreation Master Plan designates McHenry Creek area for the “Take it to the Extreme Trail” for hiking, biking and equestrian trails. Currently the area requesting annexation is outside the ‘8 Block’ radius to an open space or recreational area. If the “Take it to the Extreme Trail” is developed through the area, part of the deficiency will be handled. There will be a need for additional recreational areas within or near the annexation area to achieve the ‘8 Block’ strategy of the 2001 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Public Works: The Solid Waste Division of Public Works has no issues or concerns about the proposed annexation. The Traffic Engineering Division reports that at full development there would be an annual cost to the City of $11,400 for streetlights. This assumes a density of 4 units per acre, with the developer indicating a density closer to 1 and a quarter units per acre. No structures currently exist, therefore there will be no garbage pick-up required initially. Since there are no roads within the annexation area, initially there will be no street maintenance required initially. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-299 3 Utilities: Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water indicates that the development should have only minor impact on the existing water distribution system. New facilities to serve the area will have to be sized and built per CAW requirements by the developer. This may include some off-site improvements. There is an existing 16-inch water line at David O Dodd to the northeast of the site. Several 12-inch lines exit to the south and southeast of the site. The developer will have to extend service lines to and into the annexation to provide service. Entergy: No comment received. There are utility poles along the roads adjacent to the annexation area. Reliant-Energy: No comment received. Wastewater Utility: The Wastewater Utility indicated they have no objection to the annexation and that sewer main extensions would be required at the developer’s expense to serve this area. The area is within sewer basin 142. A 12-inch sewer main is along McHenry Creek as it passes under Interstate 430. The developer of the area would have to extend the McHenry line to and into the site at their cost. Schools: Little Rock District: The Little Rock School District has no concerns or issues about the requested annexation. The area is not within the Little Rock School District. Pulaski County Special District: No comment received. The area is within the Pulaski County Special School District. Attendance zones for this area are: Baker Elementary, Joe T Robison Middle School and Joe T Robinson Senior High School. ANALYSIS: This site is within the City of Little Rock Planning Jurisdiction. The City currently exercises both subdivision and zoning jurisdiction over this land. The area is December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-299 4 zoned R2, Single Family. Whether annexed or not with the area zoned as it currently is, one could legally subdivide this acreage into over 2000 single-family lots (7000 square foot lots). If the area were not annexed, due to limitations of septic systems the site would likely only be divided into between 70 to 120 lots (3 to 5 acre tracts). Due to the topography and natural features of the land the owner has indicated that the area would be developed into only single family homes with a maximum number of units in the neighborhood of 500. The site is currently heavily wooded, with two ridgelines in a northwest to southeast orientation. Gardner Company Lake is in the northern section of the annexation area, it lies between the two ridgelines. The stream that flows from Gardner Company Lake moves northeast to empty into McHenry Creek. McHenry flows to the southeast moving under I-430 and Stagecoach Road before emptying into the Fourche Creek. Two smaller tributaries of Fourche Creek flow parallel to McHenry Creek with a ridgeline separating each stream. The streams as well as the ridges run in a northwest to southeast direction. The land varies from a low of around 320 feet to a high of approximately 460 feet. The southwestern ridge reaches highs of around 460 feet with the northeastern ridge reaching heights of around 450 feet. Each of the ridgelines has steep slopes. There is a Floodplain along McHenry Creek, which includes the northeast corner of the annexation area. Since the area is outside the City Limits there is no defined Floodway. There may well be a very small amount of Floodway at the extreme northeast corner of the annexation area. The only current street access shall be Crystal Valley Road approximately a half- mile east of Colonel Carl Miller Road. The Master Street Plan however shows several additional roads, which would provide access to the area under consideration. First the Master Street proposes a north-south arterial approximately along the eastern boundary of this property. This road would be a continuation of David O Dodd to Crystal Valley Road at Stagecoach Road. The resulting road would start at Hinson Road as Napa Valley Road changing to Bowman Road at MaraLynn Road, again changing name just at Colonel Glenn Road to David O Dodd Road and finally Crystal Valley Road at Stagecoach Road. An east-west arterial is proposed to intersect the David O Dodd/Crystal Valley Road arterial in the southeast section of this annexation area. The road would be an extension of Crystal Valley Road, which runs along the northern section lines of Sections 31 & 32 Township 1 North, Range 13 West. The City Land Use Plan recommends Single Family development of the area under consideration. The Plan has not been reviewed in this area in some time. The current zoning for the area is R2, Single Family. The property owner has indicated that the development plan for the area is residential. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-299 5 This annexation area is adjacent to sections of Little Rock, which though in the City Limits for several decades, have not development significantly. Over the last couple of years interest in development has began. Several preliminary and final plats for residential subdivisions have been filed with the City for areas to the northeast and east of this annexation area. A new multi-screen theater and other commercial uses have been built about a mile and half to the north east of the area. Development interest and pressure appears to be building in the areas to the northeast and east. To the south and southwest, the Otter Creek Subdivision and related subdivisions have experienced significant increases in the number of units permitted in the last decade. Several apartment developments have been constructed along Stagecoach Road to the south and Colonel Carl Miller Road at Baseline Road to the southwest of the annexation area. In addition to these residential developments there has been retail and shopping development both at Baseline and Stagecoach Roads as well as around Otter Creek Boulevard and Stagecoach Road. The roads that service the annexation are currently two lane rural construction type roads. Crystal Valley Road is well below the design capacity of the current road. However Baseline Road, which Crystal Valley Road feeds, is nearing capacity. David O. Dodd Road is at less than a quarter of the capacity of its current design – 2 lanes. Both of these roads are beyond the annexation area, but are the route anyone would have to take either to or from the area. Since the developer is still determining the type of homes they will build, only an approximate impact on the roads and other services can be determined. We will assume that the 500 maximum indicated by the developer will be the development density for the annexation area. To determine the development rate, development in Planning Districts 16, 17 and 18 (Otter Creek, Ellis Mountain and Crystal Valley Planning Districts) since 1990 was review versus the development total for the City. Just under a quarter of the new residential homes have been constructed in the area south of Kanis Road and West of Bowman Road, including the Otter Creek area. If we assume that no more than this level of activity will continue and that no more than half of the activity from the overall area would occur in the annexation area, an average of fifty homes per year would be built in the annexation area. Since there is no approved preliminary plat and the utilities and roads to connect the annexation area to the ‘world’ must still be built, development of homes December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-299 6 should still be several years off. New home construction is not likely to start until at least 2005. At a rate of 50 units per year, with a maximum of 500 units, it would take ten years for build-out. If the annexation were approved, the area within Little Rock would increase approximately 0.5 percent to 119.47 square miles. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deferral to allow additional time to review the fire safety and other issues. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 2003) The item was placed on Consent Agenda for deferral to December 4, 2003. By a vote of 9 for, 0 against (2 absent) the item was deferred. STAFF UPDATE: The Fire and Planning Departments have held numerous meetings with the City Manager’s Office to discuss the concerns that this annexation may have on the City Fire Insurance Rating. Options of requiring additional assistance from the Developers; working with the Crystal Hill Volunteer Fire Department to be the first responder; Special Taxing Districts and other issues were reviewed. The annexation location does not contain a site which the Fire Department would need for a station. Any new station would have to be located to the south or north of this annexation area. The City financially is not in a position to even take over the annual cost of a new station, if the Developer were to build and equip such a facility. Due to lack of financial ability and other factors, the City still has not built two stations in other areas where land has already been acquired. At this time the City does not see away to provide fire service to this area without adversely affecting the areas already served. The Little Rock Police Department has indicated they too have concerns about providing service at full development. Initially, service would have to be provided by an existing patrol unit covering the Otter Creek Subdivision area. The patrol units servicing the adjacent sections of Little Rock are already stretched in part due to staffing reductions over the last few years. Further stretching of patrol districts is not viewed as an appropriate action. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-299 7 For these reason, Staff cannot recommend the area be annexed to the City of Little Rock. Staff is prepared to recommend to the City Board of Directors that sanitary sewer service be granted to this area under the following conditions. A “pre- annexation” agreement must be signed by the owner and included in the Bill of Assurance to bind future owners to this agreement. Further all Little Rock building code requirements must be followed. Any construction within the area would be subject to the same fees and inspections as those within the City. At such time as the City has the financial ability to provide fire and safety services to the area, it will be incorporated into the City of Little Rock. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Staff and the applicant agreed to do an economic analysis for the annexation. In order to allow time to do this analysis, the item needs to be deferred. The item was placed on Consent Agenda for deferral. By unanimous vote the item was deferred to January 29, 2004. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: K Name: 15901 Cantrell Road, lot 1, Appeal Land Alteration Violation, Chap 29-166 Location: Undeveloped lot at 15901 Cantrell Rd in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas Owner/Applicant: Bank of Little Rock, owner. Request: Appeal Notice of Violation #117 for conducting land alteration activities without a grading permit. STAFF REVIEW: 1. Master Street Plan This portion of Cantrell Road is a principal arterial. Seven Acres Drive is a commercial street. 2. Development Potential and Land Use This approximate 2.4 acre site fronts Cantrell Road and Seven Acres Drive. The subject property is within a POD. The property to the west is zoned R2. The adjacent businesses to the east and south are within the same POD. 3. Neighborhood Position Public Works has not received any inquiries. STAFF ANALYSIS: In the middle of August, Public Works responded to a complaint that fill material had been placed on property along Cantrell Road. Upon investigation, it was discovered that approximately 1000 to 1500 yards of dirt and concrete debris had been dumped on a lot owned by the Bank of Little Rock (the “Bank”). December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) Enforcement of the Land Alteration Regulations Sec 29-166 2 On August 20, 2003, Notice of Violation #117 (“NOV”) was issued to the Bank for constructing more than 1000 cubic yards of fill material on the property without a grading permit in violation of Little Rock Code Section 29-186(d)(2). As required by Section 29-170(c), the NOV requires the property to be restored to its original condition to the maximum extent practicable which would require removal of the fill material. The Bank has chosen to appeal the issuance of the NOV and the requirement to remove the fill. The Bank has also asked that this item be deferred until the December 4, 2003 Planning Commission meeting so that it can be considered along with a proposed revision to the POD allowing a lot split. Public Works supports the deferral. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 2003) Staff informed the Commission that the application needed to be deferred to the December 4, 2003 Agenda to correspond with a Planned Zoning Development filed for the property. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 4, 2003 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The item was deferred. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a development plan for the site, which was a separate item on the agenda (Item #14 – File No. Z5038-H). Staff stated they were supportive of the proposed restoration plan. Staff presented a recommendation the item be withdrawn from consideration. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: G-40-23 Name: Central Arkansas Water (Project 1369) – Water Main Extension Location: Along Rahling Road, Taylor Loop Road, Taylor Loop Creek and Cantrell Road Owner/Applicant: Central Arkansas Water/ McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. Proposal: In accordance with Act 186 of 1957, Central Arkansas Water is requesting approval of a 36-inch water main extension to improve their Intermediate Distribution System. 1. Public Works: 1. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Sec. 8-283 prior to construction. 2. Restoration of utility excavation cuts within proposed rights-of-way shall be in accordance with Section 30, Article V. 2. Utilities and Fire Department: L.R. Wastewater: Existing sewer mains in easements and right-of-ways located within project area. Central Arkansas Water: No Comments. Entergy: No Comments received. Southwestern Bell: SBC has facilities in the scope of this project that may need to be moved or relocated. CenterPoint Energy (Arkla): Any relocation of gas facilities will be charged to Central Arkansas Water or other responsible party. L.R. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. 3. Neighbor Notification: The Charleston Heights/North Rahling Road, Westchester/Heatherbrae, Secluded Hills and Westbury Neighborhood Associations were notified of the proposed water December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-40-23 2 main extension. As of this writing, staff has received no comments from the neighborhood associations. 4. Staff Analysis: In accordance with Act 186 of 1957, Central Arkansas Water is requesting approval of a 36-inch water main extension. The 36-inch ductile iron transmission main is proposed to supply more volume and improve system pressure in the existing Intermediate Distribution System during peak demand periods. The proposal includes the installation of approximately 10,000 linear feet of 36-inch water main, starting on the south side of Cantrell Road just east of Westbury Drive. The main is to be installed westerly approximately 3,500 feet along the south side of Cantrell Road to Taylor Loop Creek/Taylor Loop Park. The main would then run in a southerly direction, approximately 3,300 feet, within the floodplain of the creek to the intersection of Taylor Loop Road and Hinson Road. The main would then cross Taylor Loop Road and run in a westerly direction, approximately 3,200 feet, along the north side of Rahling Road, tying into an existing 20-inch water main located approximately 1,300 feet west of Pilot Court. Central Arkansas Water is currently working with the City’s Public Works and Parks Departments on obtaining an easement within the Taylor Loop Creek/Taylor Loop Park floodplain. Based on the fact that the City owns the floodplain/floodway, details of the easement must be worked out and presented to the Board of Directors for approval. The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed water main extension on October 23, 2003. The Commission voted to approve the water main extension as proposed by Central Arkansas Water. 5. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval, subject to compliance with the Public Works and Utility Comments, as noted in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 6, 2003) Joe O’Hara, of Central Arkansas Water, was present, representing the application. Staff and Mr. O’Hara provided the Committee with a brief description of the proposed water main extension project. After a brief discussion of the issue, the Committee forwarded the water main extension to the full Commission for final action. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-40-23 3 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with the Public Works and Utility Comments, as noted in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1313-E NAME: Woodlands Edge Preliminary Plat LOCATION: near Sweet Grass Drive and Woodland Trails DEVELOPER: Rocket Properties P.O. Box 3157 Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: The Mehlburger Firm P.O. Box 3837 Little Rock, AR 72203-3837 AREA: 70 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 78 FT. NEW STREET: 4,450 CURRENT ZONING: PRD – Planned Residential Development PLANNING DISTRICT: 18 – Ellis Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.07 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow increased street grades to exceed maximum allowed. 2. A variance to allow reduced a platted building line for Lots 21, 22, 34 – 36 and Lot 46 of Block 20 and Lot 16 of Block 21 (15-feet). 3. A variance to allow Lot 36, 56 of Block 20 to have a reduced minimum lot width for a corner lot. 4. A variance to allow Lots 13 and 22 of Block 21 to have a reduced minimum lot area. 5. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback (15-feet) in areas where lots abut dedicated green space. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 2 BACKGROUND: Woodlands Edge was originally approved in August 2001, as a 214-acre subdivision with 466 residential lots and 28,500 linear feet of new street. In the applicant’s original cover letter he indicated “This new neighborhood would preserve approximately 70 acres of greenbelts and open spaces and would feature a neighborhood park with connecting trails, sidewalks and footpaths. The development plan and site engineering for the Woodlands would be done in such a way as to reduce the impact of development on the land.” The applicant indicated they was not only trying to preserve as many trees as possible in the development, but was also trying to reduce the amount of excavation and fill required to create roadways and buildings sites. The applicant stated the desire was to limit disruption of the site’s hydrology by allowing the surface runoff to continue to flow in undisturbed natural basins. The cover letter also indicated the basis of the request for a reduced design standard for Woodlands Trail. The principal roadway through the property is shown on the City’s Master Street Plan as a collector street. The applicant indicated no lots would front the roadway except for thirteen of the lots on the eastern end. The applicant also indicated the roadway would be lined with wooded green belts ranging from 25-feet to over 200- feet in width on each side. In addition, the applicant indicated three traffic-calming circles approximately 1200 to 1300 feet apart along the roadway. The circles, or roundabouts, were to be designed not only to slow traffic, but also to discourage through traffic. The applicant stated the desire was to preserve more trees by allowing them to remain close to the edge of the roadway. The proposal included along the collector street, the sidewalks and trails were planned to meander within the green belts and open spaces. The property owners’ association would maintain these sidewalks and trails when located on commonly owned property. The applicant stated the desire was to create a neighborhood that looks and feels more like a wooded setting where residents could more fully enjoy the natural character of the land. The applicant also indicated by retaining more trees and minimizing the impact of development on the land, they would be able to create a higher quality neighborhood through environmentally responsible and sustainable site development and techniques. Ordinance No. 18,539 established variances for the Woodlands Edge Preliminary Plat and Ordinance No. 18,538, (both adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors August 21, 2001) allowed for a reduced design standard for Woodlands Trail in Woodlands Edge Subdivision. The approval allowed certain lots to be created as lots without public street frontage and certain lots to be created as pipe stem lots with reduced standards. Woodlands Trail was to be constructed with a 45-foot right-of-way and 28-feet of pavement with sidewalks placed outside the right-of-way in a dedicated easement not less than 10-feet in width. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 3 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to add to the subdivision by subdividing approximately 70-acres into 78 single-family lots and areas of green space. The applicant is proposing the average lot size to be 11,489 square feet and the minimum lot size to be 8,402 square feet. The applicant is proposing 4,450 linear feet of new street to be added as a result of the platting. The applicant is requesting several waivers and variances from city ordinances. The applicant is requesting street grades, which exceed the maximum allowed, platted building lines of 15-feet in various locations and a reduced rear yard setback of 15-feet on lots abutting dedicated green space. The applicant is requesting corner lots to have a reduced lot width and two of the lots to have a reduced lot area. More detail of the requested waivers and variances is listed in paragraph H along with the staff recommendation of each request. The applicant is requesting the current PRD zoning be revoked and R-2, Single- family zoning be restored. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and wooded with varying degrees of slopes. Olds Lane is contained within the proposed plat area and currently has a scattering of single- family homes. Woodlands Edge has begun developing the first phases to the east of the site and Cherry Creek Subdivision is located to the north of the proposed plat area. The site is currently zoned PRD as a part of the former Brodie Creek Development Plan. The area to the south is currently zoned R-2 Single-family as is the area to the east. The proposed 36th Street connection is located south of the proposed plat area. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed development. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association and all property owners abutting the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 4 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Sweet Grass Drive will function as and needs to be designed as a collector. Unlike Woodlands Trail, lots take direct access from this street. 2. Brodie Creek bridge crossing needs to be designed to AHTD standards. A letter of map revision may be required (FEMA). 3. While the typical section shows sidewalks, the locations should also be shown on the plan. Identify any variances requested. 4. A grading permit is accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 6. Alteration of water courses will require approval from the Little Rock District of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to the start of work. 7. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to the construction. 8. The minimum finish floor elevation is required to be shown on the plat and grading plans for those lots located in the floodplain. Show the limits of the floodplain at all locations. 9. The floodway area needs to be platted as an easement or dedicated to the City. In addition, a 25-foot floodway easement needs to be platted adjacent to the floodway. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Water main extensions will be required for this project. 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 the existing water distribution system. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 5 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 public and private streets must meet the Master Street Plan requirement. 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: (November 6, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented the item with a brief overview of the previously approved preliminary plat currently under construction. The applicant indicated they were no longer requesting a review of the northern portion of the plat area and requested a deferral of that portion only. Staff suggested the applicant withdraw the request for the northern portion and re-file when the design was secured. The applicant stated several of the variances were related to the northern portion. Staff requested additional information be shown on the proposed preliminary plat with regard to the source of water, the source of wastewater disposal, the storm drainage analysis and the preliminary storm drainage plan. Staff also requested the applicant request through a letter the PRD zoning be revoked on the site restoring the R-2, Single-family zoning. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted storm water detention would apply to the development. The applicant indicated a lake would be constructed along the western edge of the plat boundary. The applicant stated they would furnish additional information to staff. Staff stated there were concerns of allowing Sweet Grass Drive to be constructed to the requested design standard. Staff stated with the proposed number of lots and the roadway eventually connecting to West 36th Street, Sweet Grass Drive would function as a collector street even though the street was not shown on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. Staff stated Sweet Grass Drive was not December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 6 the same as Woodlands Trail since there were a large number of lots taking access to Sweet Grass and this was not the case on Woodlands Trail. After a lengthy discussion of the proposed roadway and rights-of-way, staff suggested the applicant meet with Public Works and Planning prior to the public hearing to resolve as many outstanding issues as possible. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the source of water and the source of disposal of wastewater on the proposed preliminary plat, Central Arkansas Water and Little Rock Wastewater respectively. The applicant has also indicated the names of platted subdivisions abutting the plat area and has shown the names of owners of all unplatted tracts abutting the plat area and the names of owners of platted tracts in excess of two and one-half acres. The applicant met with staff to discuss Sweet Grass Drive and the proposed design standard. Staff is agreeable the proposed design standard of a residential street is acceptable. The applicant is proposing 26-foot of pavement with 50-foot right-of-way and the street to stub to properties located to the south. The applicant has indicated the development of the area with 78 single-family homes at a density of 0.91 units per acre. The applicant has indicated there is an additional 70 to 100 acres lying south of the site that is “developable”. The applicant has indicated a connection to the proposed West 36th Street Extension will not be made, if the area to the south develops or if a connection is made the two subdivisions will not be connected through street design to ensure a “cut- through” the neighborhood is not developed. The applicant is requesting several waivers and variances from the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow increased street grades to exceed maximum allowed. The applicant has indicated in most areas the grades will be met but in some areas the grades may exceed the minimum allowed. The applicant has indicated with the reduced street widths to minor residential street and residential street standard, the grades will be more easily achieved. Staff is supportive of the request to allow the increased grades. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow a reduced platted building line for Lots 21, 22, 34 – 36 and Lot 46 of Block 20 and Lot 16 of Block 21 of 15- feet. The areas with the reduced platted building lines are in areas abutting cul- de-sacs or street bulbs with the exception of Lots 34 – 36 of Block 20. Staff is supportive of the request to allow the lots to develop with a reduced platted December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 7 building line. The topography of the site is such that a reduced building line is necessary to allow the lots to develop with preservation in mind. The entire development has been constructed with conservation and preservation of green space. If the lots develop with the typical 25-foot platted building line, the applicant would reduce the designated green space along the rear of these lots. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow Lots 36 and 56 of Block 20 to have a reduced minimum lot width for a corner lot. The Subdivision Ordinance required corner lots to have a minimum 75-foot width to allow for the platted building lines on each corner to reduce visibility problems. Staff is supportive of the reduced corner lots on these two lots. Lot 36 is located on the corner of a cul-de-sac that serves four lots and Lots 56 is 74-feet in width. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow Lots 13 and 22 of Block 21 to have a reduced minimum lot area. The ordinance requires all lots to have a minimum of 7,000 square feet. The lots are approximately 6,000 and 6,800 square feet in area. The lots are corner lots on Bridge Road. Staff is supportive of allow the lots to develop with a reduced minimum lot area. Staff feels the lots will have ample buildable area even with the required setbacks on each street side. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow a reduced setback (15-feet) in areas where lots abut dedicated green space. Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant has indicated and staff agrees in these areas the rear yard setbacks will appear much greater and if a reduced setback is granted there should be minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining properties. The applicant has indicated storm water detention on the proposed site plan. There are two areas, which could potentially serve as storm water detention. The site contains a lake with a dam that has been damaged, which could be reconstructed for an additional amenity to the development or there is a second area that has been identified that could serve as storm water detention. The applicant is requesting the previously approved PRD zoning be revoked on the area allowing the base zoning of R-2, Single-family to be restored. Staff is supportive of this request. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff recommends approval of the request to subdivide this 70-acre parcel into 78 single-family residential lots and the associated variances. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1313-E 8 Staff recommends approval of the following variances from the Subdivision Ordinance: • A variance to allow increased street grades to exceed maximum allowed. • A variance to allow reduced a platted building line for Lots 21, 22, 34 – 36 and Lot 46 of Block 20 and Lot 16 of Block 21 of 15-feet. • A variance to allow Lot 36, 56 of Block 20 to have a reduced minimum lot width for a corner lot. • A variance to allow Lots 13 and 22 of Block 21 to have a reduced minimum lot area. • A variance to allow a reduced setback (15-feet) in areas where lots abut dedicated green space. Staff recommends approval of the request to revoke the existing PRD zoning classification and restore R-2, Single-family zoning to the area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the John Barrow Neighborhood Association had indicated support of the proposed preliminary plat subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the staff report. 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 following variances from the Subdivision Ordinance: • A variance to allow increased street grades to exceed maximum allowed. • A variance to allow reduced a platted building line for Lots 21, 22, 34 – 36 and Lot 46 of Block 20 and Lot 16 of Block 21 of 15-feet. • A variance to allow Lots 36, 56 of Block 20 to have a reduced minimum lot width for a corner lot. • A variance to allow Lots 13 and 22 of Block 21 to have a reduced minimum lot area. • A variance to allow a reduced setback (15-feet) in areas where lots abut dedicated green space. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request to revoke the existing PRD zoning classification and restore R-2, Single-family zoning to the area. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-1405 NAME: Chenal Parkway – Highway 10 Commercial Preliminary Plat LOCATION: On the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Highway 10 – Chenal Parkway LLC 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 21.9 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 8 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, with conditions - Site Plan Review PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.11 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 15,603 on December 20, 1988, rezoning the parcel and requiring a zoning site plan review of any future development. The site is currently zoned C-3, with conditions. The applicant proposes to subdivide this 21.9-acre tract into 9 non-residential lots. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1405 2 The proposed lots average 2.74 acres. Seven of the proposed nine lots range in size from 0.97 acres to 2.30 acres. Lot 9 is proposed to contain 10.49 acres. The applicant is proposing the placement of a sixty-foot access and utility easement service drive within the development to limit the number of curb-cuts onto the City streets. There are two accesses onto Cantrell Road, each being full intersections. The applicant has indicated access along the proposed lot lines. The developer will construct all improvements to Chenal Parkway when the first lot or drive to Chenal is constructed and similarly will construct all required improvements to Cantrell Road when the first lot or drive is constructed. The applicant has indicated final platting will be take place as individual lots are sold and/or developed. The applicant is also requesting consideration for lots to be combined if necessary with the stipulation that there will be no more than nine lots and the minimum lot size will not drop below the minimum lot size for C-3 zoned property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant tree covered site sloping from north to south. The site across Chenal Parkway is currently wooded and was recently approved for development as a large-scale retail development. As a separate item on this agenda an out parcel of the retail site is being considered for rezoning to remove the condition of a site plan review prior to development (Item #15 – File No. Z- 5097-E). South of the site is Northfield Drive with vacant O-2 zoned property on the south side of the roadway. Southeast of the site is a vacant tract also zoned O-2. West of the site and adjacent to Cantrell Road is a tract of C-3 zoned property currently being used as a single-family home site. Adjacent to Northfield Drive to the west is undeveloped R-2 zoned property. North of the site are developed and undeveloped zoned parcels of commercial and office zoned property. A Texco is located on the northwest corner and a mini-warehouse development is located on the northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The DuQuesnne Property Owners Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association and the Bayonne Property Owners Association and all property owners abutting the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1405 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway are classified on the Master Street Plan as principal arterials. A minimum dedication of right-of-way 55 feet from centerline will be required. At intersections, additional right-of-way may be needed to accommodate turn lanes. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvement to the streets including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Traffic Engineering comments are as follows: - Construct a right-turn lane on Cantrell Road (400-feet long with 200- foot taper) - Construct corner island for south-west corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway - Construct southbound right-turn lane on Chenal Parkway at Northfield Drive - Construct corner island at Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive 3. Plans of all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of- way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 4. Obtain permits for improvements within the State Highway right-of-way from AHTH, District VI. 5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Indicate whether regional or individual detention is to be provided. 7. Striping and signage plans for both public and private streets should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 8. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the spacing criteria of Section 30- 43 and 31-210. It is recommended that only one driveway be constructed on Cantrell Road and all lots take access from the access easement, or spacing from the intersection be changed to a 300-foot minimum. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1405 4 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Locate all utilities before excavating or digging. 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. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 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: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were some concerns with the access drive extending from Chenal Parkway to Northfield Drive. Mr. Daters stated the development was proposing the placement of two drives onto Chenal Parkway both of which were right-in and right-out only drives and only one full access driveway onto Cantrell Road. Staff stated even so there were still concerns with traffic cutting through the development to access the future traffic light at Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive. Staff also noted the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1405 5 driveway spacing did not meet the criteria established by the Master Street Plan or the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Daters stated he would work with Public Works staff to resolve this issue. Staff also requested additional information concerning the street improvements. Mr. Daters stated the street improvements would be constructed to the roadways when a lot abutting the road was developed. Mr. Daters also stated the lots would be final platted as each individual lot was sold. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted a grading permit would be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Staff also noted storm water detention ordinance would apply to the property. 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 site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has also indicated shared driveway locations for Lots 1, 2 and 3 abutting Cantrell Road and shared drives between Lots 4 and 5 and 6 and 7 to limit the number of curb cuts on Chenal Parkway. Proposed Lot 8 is to be served by a 60-foot Access and Utility Easement extending from Cantrell Road to Northfield Drive. The applicant has indicated the eastern most drive along Cantrell Road the minimum required distance from the intersection of Chenal Parkway. Section 31- 210 (e)(1) states “a lot will require seven hundred fifty feet of frontage for two drives, if the lot is adjacent to an intersecting collector street or street of a higher classification. The site has approximately 670 feet of frontage but staff feels the placement of two drives should have minimal to no impact on adjoining properties and traffic flow in the area. The applicant has revised the proposed preliminary plat to address staff’s concerns with regard to the cut-through traffic. As per Section 31-210(g)(6) “service drives shall not connect in direct line to public streets, so as to provide short cuts or alternate street flows”. The current placement of the drive does not provide a cut-through from Cantrell Road to Northfield Drive. The site is currently zoned C-3 with conditions (zoning site plan review). The site is also located in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed lots meet the minimum lot area requirement for C-3 zoned property (14,000 square feet) as required per the Subdivision Ordinance and they meet the minimum lot size requirement for the Highway 10 Design Overlay District (a minimum of two acres). Staff is supportive of the proposed lot layout and size. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1405 6 The applicant has indicated a one hundred foot building line adjacent to Cantrell Road and a fifty foot building line adjacent to Chenal Parkway. The one hundred foot building line for Cantrell Road meets the minimum requirement for the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed fifty foot building line along Chenal Parkway is more than adequate to meet the minimum requirement for commercially zoned property. The applicant has indicated street construction will be phased with the final platting of the lots. The applicant has indicated when one of the lots abutting Cantrell Road is final platted the entire road frontage will be constructed. The applicant has indicated the same is true for the frontage along Chenal Parkway. Staff is supportive of the request to phase the street improvements in this manner. Per the Master Street Plan right-turn lanes are required at major intersections. The applicant will be required to dedicate additional right-of-way on both Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road to allow the right-turn lanes to be installed. The proposed preliminary plat does not indicate the required right-of-way to allow for the right-turn lane construction. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The applicant has meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance as well as the minimum requirements of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. Staff recommends the applicant indicated required right-of-way along Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road for the right-turn lane. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White 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 the applicant indicate the required right-of-way along Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road for the right-turn lane. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1406 NAME: Assembly of God Preliminary Plat LOCATION: On the northwest corner of the I-30 Frontage Road and Sibley Hole Road DEVELOPER: Arkansas District Council of the Assembly of God 8300 Geyer Springs Road Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 10.2 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-4 PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek CENSUS TRACT: 41.03 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 5-year deferral of street improvements to Sibley Hole Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the subdivision of this 10.15-acre tract into two lots. Roller Drummond sold the proposed Lot 1 to the Assembly of God several years ago for the future development of an office building. Proposed Lot 1 is currently December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1406 2 vacant but the owners now wish to construct an office building at this location. Roller Drummond Funeral Home is located on proposed Lot 2. Currently, the right-of-way meets the Master Street Plan requirement on both Sibley Hole Road and the I-30 Frontage Road. The developer is requesting a variance for driveway spacing on Sibley Hole Road and the I-30 Frontage Road. The developer is also requesting a deferral of street improvements to Sibley Hole Road for five (5) years or until adjacent development occurs. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Proposed Lot 2 is vacant and proposed Lot 1 contains Roller Drummond Funeral Home. Gator Golf and a cemetery are located west of the site. Other uses in the area include heavy commercial uses such as manufacturing, equipment sales and rental and large industrial uses. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners concerning the proposed development. Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and all property owners abutting the proposed plat area were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed land use would classify Sibley Hole Road on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30-feet from centerline. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvements to the street, including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 5. The driveway locations are acceptable. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: A 10-foot easement is required for 1Ø or 3Ø underground service. A 30- December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1406 3 foot easement is required for 1Ø or 3Ø overhead service. Contact Entergy at 954- 5158 for additional details. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The 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 the 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: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff noted the request was to subdivide a ten acre parcel into two non-residential lots. Staff stated one of the lots contained an existing use, Roller Drummond Funeral Home and the second lot was vacant. Staff requested additional information to be shown on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested the applicant provide the names of owners of all abutting lands, the source of title for the land owner and the zoning classifications within the plat boundary. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed driveway locations were acceptable. Staff also noted a grading permit would be required prior to any development. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the property. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1406 4 Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water, Entergy and Wastewater. Mr. White stated he would contact these agencies for additional information. 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 the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the names of owners of all abutting lands, the source of title of the land owner and the zoning classifications within and abutting the plat boundary. The applicant has also noted a grading permit will be secured prior to construction and on-site storm water detention will be provided. The proposed plat meets with the minimum requirements for C-4 zoned property. The minimum required lot size for C-4 zoned property is 14,000 square feet and a minimum lot width of 100-feet. The applicant has indicated three (3) plus acres for each lot, more than adequate to meet this minimum requirement. The applicant has indicated two (2) driveway locations on each lot. The drives on Lot 1 are proposed as one access from the I-30 Frontage Road and one access from Sibley Hole Road. Although the driveway spacing does not meet the typical minimum required spacing requirement per the Subdivision Ordinance or the Master Street Plan, staff is supportive of the location of the drives. The applicant has placed the drives on Lot 2 mid-way of the property frontage in each instance. The two (2) drive locations for Lot 2 are existing. The applicant is requesting a five (5) year deferral of street improvements to Sibley Hole Road. Staff is supportive of the request for the five (5) year deferral of street improvements to Sibley Hole Road or until adjacent development occurs. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the development of the plat as proposed should have minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the request for a five (5) year deferral of street improvements to Sibley Hole Road or until adjacent development whichever occurs first. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1406 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White 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 request for a five (5) year deferral of street improvements to Sibley Hole Road or until adjacent development whichever occurs first. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1407 NAME: Oxford Pointe Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: On West 57th Street, 2 Blocks east of Geyer Springs Road DEVELOPER: Mystery Properties P.O. Box 56403 Little Rock, AR 72215 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 309 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 4.714 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 19 FT. NEW STREET: 540 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 13 – 65th Street East CENSUS TRACT: 21.02 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow double frontage lots for Lots 9 and 10. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The development consists of 4.714 acres, located on West 57th Street, two blocks east of Geyer Springs Road. The property is currently zoned R-2, Single- family and the applicant proposes to subdivide this tract into a 19 lot single-family subdivision. The proposed development will add 540 linear feet of new street December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1407 2 and end in a cul-de-sac taking no access to West 59th Street. The development will be constructed in one phase. The applicant has indicated a platted building line of 25-feet along the street property line as required by the City of Little Rock Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-256. The applicant has also indicated a 25-foot platted building line along with a 10-foot restricted access easement for the two lots adjacent to West 57th Street to ensure no vehicle access will be allowed to limit the number of curb cuts on West 57th Street. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance [Section 31-232(d)] to allow two of the nineteen lots to develop as double frontage lots. The applicant has indicated a ten foot restricted access easement to ensure no vehicle access will be allowed on to West 59th Street. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The northern portion of the site is vacant and the southern portion has two homes located along West 59th Street. There is a large church located northwest of the site and single-family homes located along West 57th Street to the northeast. There is a newly developing single-family subdivision located on the north side of West 57th Street at Freeland. South of the site is a C-3 zoned parcel containing a mobile home park. The areas to the east and west are developed as single-family homes. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed development. The Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association, the Wakefield Neighborhood Association, Southwest United for Progress and all abutting property owners were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Proposed Oxford Run Court should have a minimum street width of 24-feet. There appears to be a discrepancy in the drawing as to curb and sidewalk location. 2. The cul-de-sac diameter should be 100-feet for the right-of-way, with 80-feet to the back of curb. 3. Easements for proposed storm water detention facilities are required. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1407 3 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: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. 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 the 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: Street widths are required to meet the Master Street Plan requirement. 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: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant. Staff presented an overview of the proposed preliminary plat indicating additional items needed to be shown on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested the applicant provide a phasing plan, if applicable. Staff also requested the applicant provide a 10-foot restrictive access easement along West 57th Street for Lots 1 and 19 and Lots 9, 10 and 11 along West 59th Street. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1407 4 Staff also noted Lots 9, 10 and 11 would result in a variance; the creation of double frontage lots. Mr. McGetrick stated he would verify right-of-way for West 59th Street. He stated he did not think right-of-way for West 59th Street was in place for the entire length. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Oxford Run Court should have a minimum street width of 24-feet. Staff also stated there appeared to be a discrepancy in the drawing as to curb and sidewalk location. Mr. McGetrick stated he would increase the pavement width and correct the discrepancy with regard to the curb and sidewalk location. Staff noted the comment concerning the cul-de-sac diameter. Mr. McGetrick stated he could correct the diameter to 100-feet of right-of-way with 80-feet to the back of curb. Comments from Central Arkansas Water, the Fire Department and Wastewater were noted. Mr. McGetrick stated their comments would be addressed as well. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a minimum street width of 24-feet and corrected the location of the sidewalk and curb location on the proposed drawing. The applicant has also increased the cul-de-sac diameter to 100-feet of right-of-way and increased the pavement width to 80-feet back of curb to back of curb. The applicant has also indicated a 10-foot restrictive access easement of 10-feet along West 57th Street and West 59th Street. The restrictive access easement along West 57th Street will limit the driveway location near the intersection of West 57th Street and Oxford Run Court. The applicant has indicated right-of-way for West 59th Street is in place along Lots 9 and 10. This will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of double frontage lots [Section 31-232(d)]. The applicant has indicated a restrictive access easement along the rear of the proposed lots. Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow the creation of double frontage lots as proposed. The applicant is proposing the average lot size to be sixty-feet (60) by one hundred forty-three (143) feet or 8,580 square feet. The proposed lot size is more than adequate to meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance (a minimum of sixty (60) feet by one hundred (100) feet and a minimum of 7000 square feet). Staff is supportive of the proposed lot size and configuration. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1407 5 The applicant has indicated detention on the proposed plat (contained within Lot 9) and has identified the detention basin area. The applicant has not however indicated the detention basin and outfall line as an easement. Staff recommends the applicant more clearly show and label the detention basin and appropriate easements. Staff feels the size of Lot 9 will more than adequately handle the detention basin along with all required easements and allow sufficient room for future construction. The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed in one stage or phase. All street work and infrastructure will be placed prior to final platting. Staff is supportive of the proposed phasing plan of the development. 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 from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of double frontage lots for Lots 9 and 10. Staff recommends the applicant clearly label the detention area and appropriate easements. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association had indicated support of the proposed preliminary plat subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the staff report. 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 presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of double frontage lots for Lots 9 and 10 and Staff recommended the applicant clearly label the detention area and appropriate easements. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 Recuse (Commissioner Fred Allen). December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-1408 NAME: Shackleford Farms Preliminary Plat LOCATION: along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway and south of Champlin Drive DEVELOPER: Shackleford Family LLC c/o Wingfield Martin 221 West 2nd Street, Suite 210 Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 120 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 21 FT. NEW STREET: 4,875 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-2, MF-18, MF-6, R-3 and R-2 PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow double frontage lots for Lots 5 - 9. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to subdivide this 120-acre tract into 21 lots of various sizes based on the proposed zoning. The applicant has indicated seven lots proposed as multi-family development, ten lots proposed as office development and four lots proposed as commercial development. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1408 2 The multi-family lots all will be accessed by Wellington Hills Road. The proposed lots range in size from five acres to thirty plus acres. The applicant has indicated four commercial lots. The lots are proposed adjacent to the proposed extension of Arkansas Systems Drive. The proposed office lots range in size from one-half acre to twenty-one plus acres. There are nine lots fronting Kirk Road, which average one hundred twenty-five feet by one hundred eight-four feet and a larger tract (21+ acres) proposed to front Wellington Hills Road. The applicant has indicated a new commercial street extending from Arkansas System Drive to connect to a proposed minor arterial Wellington Hills Road with for lots proposed as commercial development. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow double frontage lots for Lots 5 – 9. The lots are proposed to front Wellington Hills Road and will also abut Kirk Road. The applicant has also filed a several requests for the area in association with an overall development plan. There is a request to rezone several parcels within the plat boundary (Z-4807-E – Item 6.3) along with a request to amend the City’s Future Land Use Plan (LU03-19-02 – Item #6.1). The applicant has also filed a request to amend the City’s Master Street Plan to remove three collectors along the proposed minor arterial named Wellington Hills Road/Champlin Road between Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway (File No. MSP03-04 – Item #6-2). Please see each of the individual items for specifics on each request. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant gently sloping; site the remnant of the old Shackleford Dairy Farm. The area to the west is developing as office and commercial uses abutting Chenal Parkway and the area to the southwest along Kirk Road has not redeveloped. To the east of the site are vacant lands owned by the developers of the Villages of Wellington. North of the site are the Carrington Park Apartments (zoned MF-18) and a vacant O-3 zoned tract. To the northwest is a MF-18 zoned tract, which the Commission recently approved for a multiple building site plan review for a multi-family development. South of the site is a PD-C zoned site for Riverside Acura automobile dealership. Small scale office development is occurring along Kirk Road on the east side. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents or property owners concerning the proposed development. The Parkway Place Property Owners Association and the St. Charles Property Owners Association December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1408 3 and all abutting property owners of the site were notified of the proposed plat additional notes were sent for the rezoning and plan amendment request. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The plat proposal for extending and improving the minor arterial, Wellington Hills Road, and the collectors, Wellington Village Road, Systems Drive and Kirk Road south of Systems Drive is acceptable. 2. North of Systems Drive, boundary street improvements would also be required for the remainder of the Kirk Road right-of-way, or a right-of-way abandonment should be filed as a part of this plat. 3. The plat should show access to the O-2 zoned property just north of the Arkansas Systems property. The current plan calls for the extension of Wellington Village Road to meet a cul-de-sac on that property. 4. Public Works has no objection to the removal of the collector street from the Master Street Plan that was to link Kirk Road to Wellington Hills Road. 5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Identify whether storm water detention facilities are to be provided on a regional basis or for each individual lot. 7. Provide the directional flow and all storm water flows (Q) entering and leaving the property. Easements are required for all drainage areas. 8. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinance. Contact Traffic Engineering at (510) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light requirements. 9. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. This applies to Lots 8 through 21 and Lot 23. The lot widths must be increased to the ordinance standard of at least 125-feet if shared driveways are platted or 250-feet for individual driveways. The width of driveways must not exceed 36-feet. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1408 4 Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: A ten foot easement is required around the perimeter of the site as well as adjacent to all proposed roadways. Contact SBC at 373-5112 for additional information. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Water main extensions will be required for this project. 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 the 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: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed project indicating the development also included a request for rezoning, an amendment to the Future Land Use Plan and a request to amend the Master Street Plan. Staff noted there were additional items necessary on the proposed preliminary plat to complete the review. Staff stated the source of title along with a phasing plan should be included. Staff stated the proposed lots along Kirk Road should be reconsidered. Staff stated with the current Master Street Plan there was a proposed collector street crossing a few of the lots, which would result in the lots being unbuildable. Staff also noted the proposed lots did not allow for proper driveway spacing per the Subdivision Ordinance or the Master Street Plan. Staff suggested the applicant review the proposed design in this area. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1408 5 Staff also questioned the dedication of right-of-way for the large O-2 zoned parcel to the north. Staff requested the applicant provide right-of-way extending Kirk Road to the north to allow access to the site. Mr. White stated the property owner of the un-served tract to the north would have access from Chenal Parkway through a tract of land extending between the Villages at Rahling Road and the MF-18 zoned parcel. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff requested the applicant provide the directional flow and all storm water flows entering and leaving the property. Staff requested the applicant to provide storm water detention facilities and the plans if the detention would be on-site or provided regionally. Mr. White stated he would address this issue upon resubmission. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated detention will be provided on a regional basis. The applicant has also indicated the final platting of the lots will be market driven. The applicant has revised the plan to meet the minimum requirements for driveway spacing for the proposed lots fronting Kirk Road. The applicant has indicated the lots will be 125 feet by 184 feet and contain a minimum of 23,000 square feet. The applicant is requesting the lots be zoned as O-3, which typically requires a minimum lot area of 14,000 square feet. The applicant has indicated a large tract (Lot 20), the majority of which is currently zoned O-2 as a separate lot. The typical minimum requirement for an O-2 zoned parcel is a minimum of two acres and two hundred feet of frontage. The proposed parcel is more than adequate to meet the minimum requirements. The applicant has not indicted a collector street currently shown on the Master Street Plan, which is proposed to extend from Kirk Road to Wellington Hills Road through Lot 20. Staff feels the proposed collector should be indicated on the preliminary plat and the proposed lots abutting Kirk Road be modified to allow for the street location (Lots 10 – 19). Staff feels once the street is indicated on the proposed preliminary plat the number of lots will be reduced. Staff feels the subdivision of the smaller lots in this area is premature. Staff feels the applicant should leave this area with the larger tract and when development is secured revise the preliminary plat in accordance with the development’s needs. There is also the issue related to the proposed collector street shown on the City’s Master December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1408 6 Street Plan. Staff feels this street is critical until a development plan has been submitted for the proposed 21 acre tract of office zoning. The applicant has indicated an extension of Arkansas Systems Drive to Wellington Hills Road. The four lots abutting this new street are proposed as commercial uses. The applicant has indicated lot sizes ranging from 0.88 acres to 1.63 acres. The proposed lots meet the typical minimum requirement for commercially zoned property (C-1 – 7,000 square feet and C-3 – 14,000 square feet). The remainder of the lots proposed will take access from Wellington Hills Road. The proposed parcels range in size from five plus acres to twenty plus acres. The applicant has indicated multi-family zoning on these lots. The acreage is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum requirements for site area. The applicant has not indicated access to the northern O-2 zoned parcel (north of Arkansas System). Staff has requested the applicant extend Kirk Road to the north to access this site. Arkansas Systems has committed to one-half street improvements to Kirk Road to their northern property line. Staff feels this owner should also construct one-half street improvements in this area to match the improvements to the west. Staff feels there are many outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. There are unresolved street issues associated with the request. and staff feels the proposed lots abutting Kirk Road premature. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were several registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested this item be deferred to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 6.1 FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Chenal Planning District Location: North of Chenal Parkway, South of Rahling Road Request: Area 1: Office and Multifamily to Commercial. Area 2: Commercial to Office. Area 3: Multifamily to Office. Area 4: Single Family to Park / Open Space. Area 5: Single Family to Public Institutional. Area 6: Low Density Residential to Multifamily. Area 7: Single Family to Multifamily. Source: Joe White, White - Daters & Associates PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District from Office, Multifamily, Low Density Residential, and Single Family to Office, Commercial, and Multifamily. The Office category represents services provided directly to the consumers (e.g., legal, financial, medical) as well as general offices, which support more basic economic activities. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they serve. The Multifamily category accommodates residential development of ten (10) to thirty-six (36) dwelling units per acre. The applicant wishes to develop the property for commercial, office, and multifamily uses. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include an area shown as Low Density Residential at the end of Wellington Hills Road to recognize existing zoning and the proposed multi- family development. In addition, the application was expanded to include a change from Single Family to Park / Open Space at the northwest corner of Wellington Hills and Wellington Village Road (Area 4), and a change from Single Family to Public Institutional on the west side of Wellington Village Road (Area 5) to recognize existing zoning and the uses. The Park / Open Space category includes all public parks, recreation facilities, greenbelts, flood plains, and other designated open space and recreational land. The Public Institutional category includes public and quasi-public facilities that provide a variety of services to the community such as schools, libraries, fire stations, churches, utility substations, and hospitals. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 2 EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The applicant’s property is about 120.0 acres ± of pastureland. The portion of the applicant’s property on the west side of the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial is zoned R-2 Single Family at the end of Champlin Drive, MF-18 Multifamily at the end of Kirk Road, O-2 Office and Institutional along Kirk Road, and MF-18 at the south end of the applicant’s property. The east side of the Proposed Minor Arterial is zoned R-2 at the end of Champlin Drive, R-3 Single Family in the middle, and MF-6 Multifamily at the end of Wellington Hills Road. The expanded area consists of vacant land zoned MF-18 near the end of Wellington Hills Road, a retention pond at the northwest corner of Wellington Hills and Wellington Village Road zoned R-2, and property zoned R-2 with a Conditional Use Permit for a church on the west side of Wellington Village Road. The vacant land neighboring the study area beginning at the end of Champlin Drive is zoned MF-18, R-2, and MF-6. The property wrapping around the east side of the expanded area consists of houses located in the vicinity of Wellington Hills Road zoned R-2. The property on the east side of the intersection of Wellington Hills and Wellington Village Roads consist of a church zoned R-2 with a C.U.P. and vacant land at the northeast corner zoned O-1 Quiet Office. The south side of Wellington Hills Road includes vacant land zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial at the Wellington Village intersection, plus offices and a radio station zoned Planned Office Development at the end of Wellington Hills. The land to the south along Chenal Parkway includes a church zoned R-2 with a C.U.P. at Kanis Road, and an automobile dealership zoned Planned Development - Commercial at Kirk Road. The property to the west along Kirk Road consists of a convenience store zoned C-3 General Commercial at Chenal Parkway, offices and vacant land zoned O-2 along the west side of Kirk Road on both sides of Systems Drive, and vacant land zoned MF-18 on the south side of Rahling Road at Chenal Valley Drive. A small parcel of vacant land zoned O-3 is located north of the applicant’s property on the end of Champlin Drive on the west side. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On June 17, 2003 multiple changes were made from Office, Multifamily, and Single Family to Multifamily and Low Density Residential along the south side of Rahling Road at Chenal Valley Drive within a 1 mile radius of the current study area, which includes some of the property addressed by this amendment, and resulted in the current Future Land Uses shown for the study area to accommodate proposed development and recognize existing conditions. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 3 On September 18, 2001 a change was made from Single Family, to Neighborhood Commercial and Office on Rahling Road at Chenal Valley Drive and Champlin Drive about 1/10 of a mile north of the amendment area to accommodate proposed development. On September 18, 2001 a change was made from Low Density Residential to Single Family for an area located northeast of the end of Lamarche Drive about 1 mile north of the study area to recognize existing conditions. On April 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family, Multifamily, and Park/Open Space to Community Shopping on Rahling Road & Chenal Parkway about ¼ of a mile west of the study area to accommodate proposed development. On January 4, 2000 a change was made from Office to Mixed Office Commercial at 15500 Chenal Parkway about 1/10th of a mile southwest of the amendment area to accommodate proposed development. The portion of the applicant’s property on the west side of the Champlin / Wellington Hills connection is shown as Multifamily, Office and Commercial. The land between the area shown as Office and the Proposed Minor Arterial is shown as Multifamily. The east side of the applicant’s property is shown as Single Family to the north and Low Density Residential to the south. The expanded area is shown as Low Density Residential at the end of Wellington Village Road, Single Family at the northwest corner of the Wellington Hills / Wellington Village intersection, and along the west side of Wellington Village Road. The neighboring property north of the study area is shown as Office and Multifamily at the end of Champlin Drive. The land wrapping around the east side of the expanded study area is shown as Single Family. The intersection of Wellington Hills and Wellington Village is shown as Public Institutional on the east side of Wellington Village and Suburban Office at the corner. The land on the south side of Wellington Hills is shown as Neighborhood Commercial at Wellington Village Road and Suburban Office at the end of Wellington Hills. The property to the south along Chenal Parkway is shown as Public Institutional at the intersection of Kanis Road and Commercial from Kanis to Kirk Road. The land to the west is shown as Commercial at the Chenal / Kirk intersection and Office along the west side of Kirk Road. The land at the northwest corner of the study area is shown as Multifamily. MASTER STREET PLAN: Champlin Drive / Wellington Hills Road is shown as a Minor Arterials. The Champlin end intersecting Rahling Road is built to a 5-lane standard while Wellington Hills segment is built to a 4-lane standard with a raised median. A December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 4 Proposed Collector Street is shown to link Wellington Village Road to the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial. The completed portion of Wellington Village is classified as a Collector Street built to Collector standards. A second Proposed Collector Street will link Systems Drive from Kirk Road to the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial. A third Proposed Collector Street will link Kirk Road to the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial and is the subject of a Master Street Plan Amendment on this agenda. 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 along Rock Creek in the median of Chenal Parkway within an eight block walking distance south of the application area. The plan is to develop the median of Chenal Parkway as a linear park and will include the construction of the Class I bikeway shown on the Master Street Plan. Since this amendment covers a large area, the northern portions of the study area are located in a Service Deficit Area and would require the development of park and open space facilities to serve future developments. 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: Area 1: (Office & Multifamily to Commercial) This change would introduce an area of Commercial that would provide land to serve the offices to the west and residential areas to the east and significantly increase the potential intensity of development that could occur in the neighborhood. The location of this area between non-residential uses to the west and residential uses to the east could provide a focal point for the neighborhood as a center of activity that could serve both of the neighboring uses. However, this change would place an inappropriately high intensity of commercial uses in an area that would be more appropriately served is less intense commercial activity. Commercial land use category would allow uses that would not provide support services to the nearby office areas during business hours and uses that would have adverse impacts on the neighboring residential areas. The adverse affects resulting from increased December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 5 traffic, noise, and visual impacts would have a greater negative impact on the residential areas to the east while leaving the non-residential areas to the west relatively non-disturbed. The proposed change to Multifamily in Areas 6 is approved, the Multifamily designation for those areas could provide a transition from the non-residential areas to the west and the less intense Low Density Residential. If the change for Area 6 is not approved, a change to Commercial in Area 1 would place a conflicting use adjacent to the area shown as Low Density Residential. At this time all of the areas providing land for retail developments are located at along Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road. The closest land to the study areas shown for non-residential uses consists of the areas shown as Office, located to the west. This change would provide vacant land for new retail development on Champlin / Wellington Hills located about halfway from the areas currently shown for retail uses. Area 2: (Commercial to Office) This change would reduce the amount of land shown as Commercial at the northeast corner of the Chenal Parkway / Kirk Road intersection. The area proposed for Office would be small enough that by itself would not require an amendment. However, this amendment is adjacent to Area 3, which for a proposed change from Multifamily to Office. The change from Commercial to Office in Area 2 is essentially an expansion for the proposed change in Area 3. The Commercial shown at the intersection of Kirk Road fronts and is accessed by Chenal Parkway. Kirk Road would front area #2. Area 3: (Multifamily to Office) This conversion would increase the area shown as Office and allow the assembly of land parcels suitable for larger office development between Kirk Road and the Champlin / Wellington Hills Connection. This alteration would allow a greater continuity of uses by establishing non- residential uses along the west side of the Champlin / Wellington Hills connection south of the Systems Drive extension. This modification would also be compatible with the Suburban Office to the east and the Commercial and Public Institutional to the south. In addition, a change to Office would provide double frontage for office developments between Kirk Road and the Champlin / Wellington Hills connection. The area shown as Office between Kirk Road and Chenal Parkway is near build-out. A change to Office provide more vacant land allow more future office development in the neighborhood. Similar to the change proposed for Area 1, the proposed change in Area 3 could have adverse affects resulting from increased traffic, noise, and visual impacts would have a potential negative impact on the residential areas to the east. If the proposed changes to Multifamily in Areas 6 are approved, the Multifamily designation for those areas could provide a transition from the non-residential areas to the west and the less intense Low Density Residential. As in Area 1, if the changes for Area 6 is not approved, a change to Office in Area 3 would place a conflicting use adjacent to the area shown as Low Density Residential. The proposal for Area 3 would also December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 6 increase the area of non-residential, requiring people live further from the proposed commerical and offices uses, further segregating uses. A change to Office in Area 3 would allow for a campus type office development. Area 4: (Single Family to Park / Open Space) A change to Park / Open Space would recognize existing conditions at the northwest corner of the Wellington Hills / Wellington Village intersection. Park / Open Space would also serve to protect the integrity of the retention pond located at the northwest corner of Wellington Hills and Wellington Village and preserve the hillside. A change to Park / Open Space would also buffer the Single Family uses to the north from the non-residential uses located to the south. In addition, Park / Open Space would also provide a transition along the north side of Wellington Village from the Suburban Office and Commercial shown south of Wellington Village and the residential areas to the west. This change along with the proposed changes for Areas 5 and 6 would buffer the less intense residential uses to the north from the more intense nonresidential uses to the south. As an existing use, or neighborhood amenity, a change to Park / Open Space should help re-enforce this area as an open space amenity to the neighborhood. Area 5: (Single Family to Public Institutional) The Public Institutional category would recognize the church and provide a transition along the west side of Wellington Village into the residential areas to the north from the non-residential areas to the south. A change to Public Institutional is intended to serve the civic needs of the neighborhood. A change to Public Institutional in Area 5, along with a change to Park / Open Space in Area 4, would complement the Suburban Office and Public Institutional on the east side of Wellington Village to create a gateway into the neighborhood. As in Area 4, this change would recognize an existing use, or neighborhood amenity, there would be little negative impact on the neighborhood as long as the present use of the property remains unaltered. However, unlike the property in Area 4, this property could be more easily converted from its present use to either residential or non-residential uses. Area 6: (Low Density Residential & Single Family to Multifamily) A change to Multifamily would eliminate the LDR fronting Wellington Hills Road and provide Multifamily along the east side of the proposed Champlin / Wellington Hills link. Although a change to Multifamily could also place a higher density of residential uses next to less intense LDR, the remaining area shown as LDR could provide a transition between densities of residential development. This change would also buffer the non-residential areas to the west from the residential areas to the east. This proposal along with the proposed change in Area 7 would create a continuous area of Multifamily from Area 4 and the Multifamily shown at the intersection of Rahling Road and Chenal Valley Drive. The change in Area 6 could also provide a transition of use intensity resulting from the proposed December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 7 change to Commercial in Area 1 from the less intense residential areas to the east. However, due to the possible densities of development in an area shown as Multifamily (up to 36 dwelling units per acre), a change to Multifamily in Area 6 compared to the possible densities in an area shown as LDR (as low as 6 dwelling units per acre), a large difference in densities could occur in developments located next to each other. Area 7: (Single Family to Multifamily) A change to Multifamily would link a change to Multifamily in Area #6 to the Multifamily shown at the end of Champlin Drive. The proposed change for Area #7 would also establish Multifamily uses on both sides of the Champlin / Wellington Hills connection between the Systems Drive extension and the proposed Wellington Village Road extension. However, as in Area 6, this could place a higher density of residential uses next to less intense residential uses without a buffer between densities of residential development. A change to Multifamily at this location would increase the area already shown as Multifamily at the end of Champlin Drive. A change to Multifamily in Area 7 could result in a greater difference between developments located in Area 7 and the lower densities allowed in the areas to the east. Multifamily developments located in Area 7 would also occur adjacent to Single Family developments that would occur in conjunction with an extension of the Wellington Village Road Collector Street. In summary, the changes proposed would establish Champlin / Wellington Hills as a boundary between residential and non-residential uses located south of systems drive. The changes for Areas 1, 2, and 3 would add place Commercial uses inside the neighborhood, expand the area shown as Office, and remove Multifamily from the west side of Champlin / Wellington Hills. The changes for Areas 4 and 5 would complement the land shown as Suburban Office and Public Institutional at the intersection of Wellington Hills and Wellington Village to establish a transition of uses along Wellington Village and create an entrance into the residential areas to the north. The change for Areas 6 would complement the changes proposed for Areas 1 and 3 to establish Champlin / Wellington Hills as a boundary between residential and non-residential uses. The change in Area 7 would increase the area shown as Multifamily currently shown at the end of Champlin Drive. These changes add a new area shown as Commercial with a slight reduction in the Office and Multifamily. The loss of Office and Multi-family in Area 1 would be offset by an increases in land shown as Office in Areas 2 & 3 and Multi-family for Areas 6 & 7. The changes to Office in Areas 2 and 3 also provides vacant land for Office uses in addition to the land already developed with Office uses along Chenal Parkway. A change for Area 5 would reinforce a neighborhood amenity, while both changes for Areas 4 and 5 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 8 recognize existing conditions. New Multifamily in Areas 6 & 7 would add vacant land to the recent increase in Multifamily shown at the end of Champlin Drive and south of Rahling Road at Chenal Valley Drive. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, Carriage Creek Property Owners Association, Chenal Ridge Property, Du Quesne Place P.O.A., Eagle Pointe Property Owners Association, Glen Eagles Property Owners Association, Hillsborough Property Owners Association, Hunters Cove Property Owners Association, Hunters Green Property Owners Association, Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, Marlowe Manor Property Owners Association, Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, St. Charles Property Owners Association, Charleston Heights/North Rahling Rd N.A., Margeaux Place Property Owners Association, and Parkway Place Property Owners Association. Staff has received one comment from area residents. The comment received was neutral. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the following changes are appropriate: Staff believes the changes in Areas 2 - 5 are appropriate to establish the Proposed Minor Arterial as a boundary between intensity of uses and to provide a transition between uses along Wellington Village Road. In area 1, a change to Neighborhood Commercial is more appropriate than a change to Commercial and would also provide small-scale goods and services to the residential areas after business hours, while providing support uses to the office areas during business hours, creating a focal point for the neighborhood. In Area 6 - 7, staff supports a change to Multi-family with the addition of a strip of Park / Open Space along the boundaries adjacent to areas shown as Low Density Residential and Single Family would be more appropriate to provide a buffer between intensity of uses. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-19-02 9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 2003) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 29, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 6.2 FILE NO.: MSP03-04 Name: Master Street Plan Amendment - Chenal Planning District Location: Between Kirk Road and the Champlin/Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial Request: Removal of a Proposed Collector Street Source: Joe White, White - Daters & Associates PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Master Street Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District for the removal of a Proposed Collector Street and abandonment of the dedicated Right-of-Way running through the applicant’s property. Collector Streets are to provide access to and from the arterial network to a development, subdivision or large center of activity, as well as access to adjacent properties. The applicant wishes to remove the Proposed Collector Street to assemble land for office development. Staff has not expanded the application since the entire length of the segment consists of right-of-way running through the applicant’s property and does not extend beyond the two streets it connects. The length of the segment is about 1,390 + feet. CURRENT MASTER STREET PLAN: The Proposed Collector Street shown would connect Kirk Road to the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial. Kirk Road is shown on the plan as a Collector Street and is built as a rural two-lane road. Kirk Road will need improvements in order to conform to the Master Street Plan standards for Collector Streets. The Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial shown on the plan is intended to link Champlin Drive to Wellington Hills Road and would need to be built. The Master Street Plan also shows an extension to Systems Drive as a Proposed Collector Street. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN: The intersection of the Proposed Collector Street with Kirk Road is shown as Commercial except for the northeast corner, which is shown as Office. The property where the Proposed Collector Street will intersect the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP03-04 2 Champlin/Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial is shown as Multifamily on the west side of the intersection, while the east side is shown as Low Density Residential. All of the land along the segment in question east of Kirk Road is the subject of a Land Use Plan amendment and is a separate item on this agenda. 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: Pastureland lies on both sides of the Proposed Collector Street. The proposed street segment that would link the office developments west of Kirk Road to the residential areas located north and east of Wellington Hills Road. The removal of the Proposed Collector Street would necessitate that the adjacent property be accessed by other means and could result in more curb cuts, on Kirk Road, Champlin / Wellington Hills, and the Systems Drive extension. The Proposed Collector Street has a dedicated Right-of-Way of 60 feet. The design standards for Proposed Collector Streets are intended to serve a traffic count of 5,000 vehicles per day. Removal of the Proposed Collector Street with the suggested future development pattern would likely increase traffic on Kirk Road and the Champlin / Wellington Hills connection. If approved, the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial would serve the role of providing access to adjacent properties. Minor Arterials are intended to provide access between different sections of the city with the secondary purpose of providing access to adjacent properties. Although Kirk Road, as a Collector Street, is intended to link the neighborhood to an Arterial, this application would increase the traffic on Kirk Road by increasing its use for access to adjacent property. Since the Proposed Collector Street is a short segment that begins at Kirk Road and ends at the Proposed Minor Arterial, it is not as likely that it would become a cut-through street. The Proposed Collector Street would be more likely to be used to access adjacent property. The current street pattern shown on the Master Street Plan anticipated a higher density of land development. The three Proposed Collectors link properties to December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP03-04 3 the Champlin / Wellington Hills Proposed Minor Arterial. If the related land use plan amendments are approved, the Future Land Use Plan would accommodate higher densities of development than is currently shown. Any increased density would generate a larger amount of traffic that would need the proposed streets shown on the Master Street Plan. The Proposed Collector Street in question, as well as the one that would extend Systems Drive, would complement each other to link the office developments to the west with residential areas located east of Champlin / Wellington Hills. If this amendment is approved the Proposed Collector Street located at the end of Systems Drive would serve a higher volume of traffic as the only link between the residential areas to the east and the non- residential areas to the west. Due to the high number of land use plan amendments in this area, there is a need for roads. This amendment bisects an area under consideration for a Land Use Plan amendment for a change from Multifamily to Office, which could increase the intensity of development and could increase the amount of traffic generated. The plan amendment could result in a larger area of intense development between Kirk Road and the Proposed Minor Arterial from Chenal Parkway and the Systems Drive extension. The Proposed Collector Street currently shown lies approximately halfway between Chenal Parkway and the systems drive extension. This Master Street Plan amendment coupled with increases of intensity of development proposed by the Land Use Plan amendment would create a an area of intense development that would only be accessed from streets located at the periphery. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, Carriage Creek Property Owners Association, Chenal Ridge Property, Du Quesne Place P.O.A., Eagle Pointe Property Owners Association, Glen Eagles Property Owners Association, Hillsborough Property Owners Association, Hunters Cove Property Owners Association, Hunters Green Property Owners Association, Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, Marlowe Manor Property Owners Association, Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, St. Charles Property Owners Association, Charleston Heights/North Rahling Rd N.A., Margeaux Place Property Owners Association, and Parkway Place Property Owners Association. Staff has received one comment from area residents. The one comment received was neutral. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP03-04 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change not appropriate based on the suggested land use pattern and information provided. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 29, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 1 ITEM NO.: 6.3 FILE NO.: Z-4807-E Owner: Shackleford Family Trust Applicant: White-Daters and Associates Location: Along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway Area: Approximately 120 acres Request: Rezoning from Various Districts to MF-18, O-2, O-3 and C-3 Purpose: Future development Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North – Apartment complex and undeveloped property; zoned MF-18, O-3 and C-1 South – Auto dealership, branch bank, dental clinic; zoned PD-C and C-3 East – Undeveloped property and mini-warehouse development; zoned R-2, R-3, MF-6, MF-18 and POD West – Single family residential, auto repair garage, office uses and undeveloped property (across Kirk Road); zoned O-2, O-3 and C-3 A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Refer to all comments for the preliminary plat (Item 6.). Show all existing and proposed right-of-way dedications on the zoning plan. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified, and the St. Charles and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4807-E 2 D. LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Office, Multifamily, Low Density Residential and Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for O-2 Office and Institutional, O-3 General Office, C-3 General Commercial and MF-18 Multifamily for office, retail and multifamily development. A land use plan amendment for a change to Office, Commercial and Multifamily is a separate item on this agenda. 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 listed an action statement that recommends the aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to influence more neighborhood-friendly and better quality development. E. STAFF ANALYSIS: Shackleford Family Trust, owner of the 120 acres of property located along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway, is requesting to rezone the majority of the property from various districts to MF-18, O-2, O-3 and C-3. The rezoning is proposed for the future development of the property. In addressing an overall development plan for the property, the applicant has also filed a land use plan amendment, master street plan amendment and preliminary plat. Those issues are also items on this Planning Commission agenda. The property is undeveloped and mostly grass-covered pasture land. Portions of the property are sparsely tree-covered. The property has varying degrees of slope. There are two (2) single family residences located within the west one-half of the property, which take access from Kirk Road. The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. There is an apartment complex and undeveloped MF-18, O-3 and C-1 zoned property to the north. There is an auto dealership, branch bank and dental clinic to the south, with a Kroger store development further south across Chenal Parkway. The Arkansas Systems Office Park is located across Kirk Road to the west, along with an auto repair business and three or four single December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4807-E 3 family residences. The majority of the property to the east is undeveloped and zoned R-2, R-3, MF-6 and MF-18. There is a mini-warehouse development at the southeast corner of the property, with the Villages of Wellington single family development being located further to the east. The applicant is proposing to rezone the majority of the property from various districts to MF-18, O-2, O-3 and C-3. The list of the proposed rezoning is as follows, with the “Area” numbers referring to the attached sketch map, and the acreage calculations being approximations. The acreage calculations do not include the proposed street rights-of-way. Area 1. Rezone from R-2 to MF-18 (5.5 Acres) Area 2. Rezone from R-3 to MF-18 (17.5 Acres) Area 3. Rezone from MF-6 to MF-18 (19 Acres) Area 4. Rezone from O-2 to MF-18 (4.5 Acres) Area 5. Rezone from MF-18 to O-2 (8.3 Acres) Area 6. Rezone from O-2 to O-3 (5 Acres) Area 7. Rezone from O-2 to C-3 (4.3 Acres) Area 8. Rezone from O-2 to MF-18 (4.3 Acres) Area 9. Rezone from R-2 to MF-18 (6 Acres) Area 10. Remain zoned MF-18 (19 Acres) Area 11. Remain zoned O-2 (13.3 Acres) The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Office, Multifamily, Low Density Residential and Single Family. The applicant has filed a land use plan amendment for a change to Office, Commercial and Multifamily. This issue is a separate item on this agenda (Item 6.1). Although staff is supportive of an overall development plan for this 120 acres, staff does not support all of the zoning changes as proposed. Staff supports the rezoning of Areas 5, 8 and 9 as described above, with Areas 10 and 11 remaining zoned MF-18 and O-2 respectively. Staff does not support the rezoning of Areas 1-4, 6 and 7 as requested. Staff feels that Areas 1-4 should be zoned to MF-12 (instead of MF-18), a lower multifamily density, with a 50 foot wide zoned OS (Open Space) strip along the east property line. Staff feels that this will provide a good transition from the minor arterial to the single family zoning to the east, and provide an adequate buffer between a multifamily development and the future expansion of the Villages of Wellington single family development. Staff also feels that Area 6 should remain zoned O-2 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4807-E 4 (instead of O-3) and maintained as part of the overall O-2 tract to the east. Staff does not feel that small O-3 zoned tracts will be appropriate for this area along the east side of Kirk Road (see Item 6. – proposed preliminary plat). Additionally, staff feels that it would be more appropriate to zone Area 7 to C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District (instead of C-3), as it is adjacent to proposed multifamily zoning to the north and east. According to Section 36-299 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, “The C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District is designed to accommodate limited retail developments within or adjacent to neighborhood areas for the purpose of supplying daily household needs of the residents food, drugs and personal services.” Staff feels that C-1 zoning would be more compatible with the overall zoning plan for the property, given the total amount of multifamily zoning proposed. Staff feels that the overall zoning plan for the property, as suggested by staff, will have no adverse impact on the adjacent property or the general area. Staff feels that the 46.5± acres of proposed MF-18 zoning on the east side of the future minor arterial is too much multifamily density of the area, given the 29 acres of MF-18 zoning proposed for the west side of the arterial along with the existing multifamily zoning and development to the north and southeast. In addition, staff believers a 50 foot wide zoned OS buffer along the east property line, north of the future minor arterial, will provide an adequate buffer between a future MF-12 development and future expansion of the single family development to the east. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the rezoning plan, as requested. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were several registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested this item be deferred to the December 18, 2003 Public Hearing. Staff stated they would recommend the application be deferred to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6.3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4807-E 5 to allow all the related item to be considered at the same time. The applicant indicated they were agreeable to this recommendation. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-1409 NAME: Madison Valley Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: west of Montgomery Road, south of Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Card Investment, LLC 12418 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 19.2 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 75 FT. NEW STREET: 2,850 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.11 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the subdivision of this 19.2 acres into 75 single-family lots. The applicant has indicated the average lot size as 65-feet by 110-feet; 7150 square feet. The proposed development will add 2850 linear feet of new street to the City. The development includes ½ street construction to December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1409 2 Montgomery Road adjacent to the site and the construction of three new residential streets. The applicant is requesting a portion of Montgomery Road right-of-way be abandoned. The area to the south is owned by Chenal Properties and the preliminary design of a proposed development does not indicate access to Montgomery Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a scattering of homes along Montgomery Road on acreage. The Baptist Church property is located east of the site with the church owning most of the land adjoining the eastern boundary of the plat. The area to the west contains homes located on five plus acre tracts accessed by Carter Lane. To the north of the site along Taylor Loop Road is the Montessori School campus. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed development. The Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association and the Charleston Heights Neighborhood Association and all abutting property owners 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. Align Gavin Court and Hanna Lane. 3. A grading permit is accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property as shown on the plans. The storm drain on Montgomery Road should also be routed to the detention pond. 5. Provide the direction of flow and all storm water flows (Q) entering and leaving the property. Show also the down-stream receiving stream or ditch. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1409 3 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: Approved as submitted. SBC: A ten foot easement is required adjacent to all proposed roadways. Contact SBC at 373-5112 for additional details. 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 the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 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: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating the proposed plat would require a variance for the development of the corner lots. Staff noted corner lots must be at least 75-feet in width to accommodate the side yard setback requirements. Mr. McGetrick stated he was revising the plan and would address this issue. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1409 4 Staff also noted the applicant should provide the names of owners of unplatted tracts abutting the plat area and the names of recorded subdivision abutting the plat area. Staff also requested Mr. McGetrick provide on the plat the zoning classification within the plat area and of abutting lands. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted storm water detention was a concern. Staff requested directional flows and all storm water flows be provided for water entering and leaving the site. Staff also requested the down- stream receiving stream or ditch be identified. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated all corner lots to be a minimum of 75-feet in width to meet the minimum requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance [Section 31-232(e)]. The applicant has indicated the names of owners of abutting parcels and indicated there are no recorded subdivisions abutting the parcel. The applicant has indicated the zoning classification of the plat area as R-2, single-family as are the adjoining properties. The applicant has indicated storm water detention on the proposed preliminary plat. The applicant has indicated Tract A as a detention area Staff feels the proposed detention is adequate to serve the proposed development. The applicant has realigned Hanna Lane and Gavin Court on the proposed preliminary plat. The applicant has also indicated a portion of Montgomery Road will be abandoned. Staff supports the abandonment of this section of roadway. Staff would recommend however the roadway not be abandoned until the applicant is ready to final plat the affected lot (Lot 66). The applicant has indicated the average lot size to be 7,150 square feet and the lots are proposed as 65-feet by 110-feet. The proposed lots are adequate to meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff is supportive of the proposed lots as presented. Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The applicant has met the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance with regard to minimum lot size, minimum lot widths and depths. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1409 5 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 request to abandon a portion of Montgomery Road near the southern perimeter of the plat. Staff would recommend the right- of-way not be abandoned until development is imminent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered 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 recommended the area north of Gavin Court be labeled as a tract and provision for maintenance of this tract be specified in the Bill of Assurance for the proposed subdivision through a Property Owners Association. Staff recommended the applicant provide access to the land located parcel located to the north of Gavin Court as well. Staff recommended approval of the request to abandon a portion of Montgomery Road near the southern perimeter of the plat. Staff stated they would recommend the right-of- way not be abandoned until development was imminent. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-3292-G NAME: Chenal Plaza Lot 1 Revised PCD LOCATION: On the southwest corner of West Markham Street and Atkins Road DEVELOPER: SB & G of Arkansas, Inc #5 Shaclkeford Plaza Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.6 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Commercial/Office Mix PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Restaurant/Retail/Office Mix VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 13,580 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on January 16, 1979, established O-3 zoning for the southern 3 acres of the site. The northern 1.64 acres was zoned O-3 prior to that date, with the Rock Creek Zoning Plan in 1977 – 78. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3292-G 2 The Little Rock Planning Commission denied a proposed site plan for the site on January 21, 1999, because of site design issues. The applicant revised the site plan and resubmitted the application, which was approved on March 4, 1999. The approved site plan included at two story office building containing 46,200 square feet, a one story office building containing 25,000 square feet and 231 parking spaces. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,272 on May 2, 2000, establishing Atkins Road Partnership – Short-form PCD located at the southwest corner of West Markham Street and Atkins Road. The approval included the development of the site with eight smaller buildings located on the southern portion of the site containing 28,800 square feet and a single 21,420 square foot commercial center located on the northern portion of the site. The approval limited the uses of the site to O-3 permitted uses for the office area and C-2 permitted uses (except restaurant) for the proposed commercial building. The hours of operation were approved as 8:00 am to 5:00 pm for the office uses and the commercial hours would be from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm. The signage was approved as a monument style sign located at each entrance, which would comply with city standard for office zones. On August 14, 2000, staff at a staff level approved a revised site plan, which decreased the number of building and total square footage on the site. The approval included the development of five single-story buildings on the southern portion of the site and a single story commercial center located on the northern portion of the site. The total square footage of the retail center was decreased to 18,240 and the total square footage of the office buildings was decreased to five buildings containing 27,200 square feet. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,640 on February 5, 2002, revising the PCD for Lot 2 only. The applicant revised the PCD for the southern lot to allow lot lines to be placed along previously approved phasing lines. The required improvements have not been completed for Lot 1. There are broken box culvert tops, there is significant settling around the storm drainage structure and the forms were not removed from the drainage structure resulting in water standing in the storm drain. The applicant has indicated all required improvements will be completed prior to the December 4, 2003 Public Hearing. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PCD to allow Lot 1 to develop with a two (2) story 20,020 square foot building. The building will contain a 5,000 square foot restaurant, 7,420 square feet of retail space and 7,600 square feet of office space. The applicant is also proposing the placement December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3292-G 3 of 90 on-site parking spaces. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height of 35-feet. The applicant has indicated an outdoor seating area along the north side of the building. This outdoor seating is associated with the proposed restaurant. The hours of operation are indicated as 7:00 am to 2:00 am seven days per week. The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed in one phase. Any site lighting will be low level and directional, directed inward away from adjoining residentially zoned properties. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Lot 1 of the site is vacant and cleared. Lot 2 has two office buildings currently constructed with the service drive in place. The property is in an area of mixed uses and zoning. The property north of this site, across West Markham Street, contains a bank office building and the Office Max/Old Navy site. The property across Atkins Road to the east contains an auto dealership and a commercial development. The property to the west contains a vacant R-2 zoned strip of property, a church, the Bale Chevrolet detail shop, one single-family residence and an undeveloped O-3 zoned tract of property. There is an existing single- family neighborhood to the south and southwest of Lot 2 and across Atkins Road southeast of Lot 2 is also a single-family neighborhood. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners 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. Improvements in the right-of-way from the previous PCD have not been completed. All work needs to be completed, inspected, accepted and a maintenance bond posted. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3292-G 4 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Grease traps will be required. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water 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 Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a new branch bank, restaurant, and office development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: A minimum twelve (12) foot wide land use buffer is required along the western perimeter of the site. Since the zoning buffer ordinance doesn’t allow utility easements to count as land use buffer area, the plan submitted fails to provide for the required land use buffer area along the western perimeter. A six (6) foot high opaque screen is required along the western perimeter of the site. This screen may be a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3292-G 5 The plan submitted fails to provide the minimum 317 square feet of building landscaping required. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 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 listed an action statement that recommends the aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to influence more neighborhood- friendly and better quality development. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff introduced the item indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review. Staff stated there were concerns with the previous development not completing the required street improvements. Mr. White stated the owner had contacted the contractor and improvements should be completed in the next few days. Staff requested the applicant provide the location of any proposed dumpster(s) along with a note concerning the required screening. Staff also requested the applicant provide a cross access parking agreement between the two lots if applicable. Staff noted the original submission included the development of a bank facility on the site. Mr. White stated this was no longer the case. He stated the development would include 5,000 square feet of restaurant space, 7,420 square feet of retail space and 7,600 square feet of office space. He noted the development included 90 on-site parking spaces, which would typically meet the minimum parking demand. Staff stated the previous approval did not allow for the development of the site with food service as an allowable use. Mr. White stated he felt the area had changed and food service was a use that could be developed on the site and be an asset to the neighborhood. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the site and requested the applicant indicate a detention area on the plan. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the plan submitted fell short of the required eight (8) percent of the interior landscaping requirement. Staff also noted screening would be required along the western perimeter of the site. Staff stated the required land use buffer along the western perimeter was not being satisfied. Staff noted the area was being requested as a utility December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3292-G 6 easement therefore not allowing the required twelve (12) foot wide land use buffer. Staff suggested the applicant contact Entergy to determine if the easement would be required. Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water, the Little Rock Wastewater Utility and the Little Rock Fire Department. Mr. White stated he would contact these agencies individually for specific questions. 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 concerns raised at the November 7, 2003, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated all site improvements will be completed prior to the December 4, 2003 Public Hearing. Should the improvements not be completed staff would recommend the item not be considered by the Commission and the item be withdrawn from consideration until all improvements are installed, inspected and accepted by the City. The revised site plan indicates the proposed dumpster to be located behind the new two (2) story building. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed around the dumpster as required by the zoning ordinance or on three sides at least two feet above the top of the container. The applicant has also indicated a six-foot high wood fence or dense evergreen plantings along the west property line. The area set aside for the land use buffer along the western perimeter is located in a 15-foot drainage and utility easement. Typically easements are not allowed to count in fulfilling the buffer requirement [Section 36-521(f)]. The applicant is requested a variance to allow the easement to count in meeting the buffer requirement. Staff is supportive of the request to allow the western perimeter land use buffer. The site buts a church located on R-2 zoned property. Staff feels if the site redevelops it will be with a use other than residential based on the redevelopment pattern in the area. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted monument style sign to be located on Lot 1. The sign is proposed as a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The proposed signage is consistent with signage allowed on office zones per the zoning ordinance. The applicant has indicated 90-on-site parking spaces. The typical minimum parking demand for a development of this type would be 89 parking spaces based on square footages of each proposed use. The applicant has also indicated an outdoor seating area, which would generate additional required parking. Based on the size of the outdoor seating area an additional seven (7) December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3292-G 7 spaces would be required. Staff feels the proposed parking adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand for the site based on each use per the zoning ordinance. Staff is supportive of the proposed development. The previous approval did not allow food service on the site but the development allowed a 21,420 square foot commercial center. The proposed parking was 41 parking spaces less than the typical minimum parking required for a commercial building of this size. The primary concern was related to the available parking and the demand for parking with a food service facility. Staff feels the location of the building, adjacent to West Markham Street allowing the office to act as a buffer to the residentially properties to the south is a good transition. The site was previously approved for a commercial center and the applicant has indicated approximately 40 percent of the building to be used as office uses. 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 the above report. Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow the landscape/buffer strip along the western perimeter to be located within a drainage/utility easement. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were several registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not installed the required infrastructure as noted in the staff write-up and requested the item be deferred to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing to allow additional time for the installation of the required improvements. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-3371-G NAME: Baptist School of Nursing and Allied Health Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: 11900 Colonel Glenn Road DEVELOPER: Baptist Health 9601 I-630 Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: The Mehlburger Firm P.O. Box 3837 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 3.637 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-2, Shopping Center District PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 – I-430 CENSUS TRACT: 24.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the minimum driveway spacing requirement. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing a zoning site plan review for this 3.637 acre C-2 zoned tract. The applicant recently acquired the site with intentions of expanding their parking lot to serve the school facility. The proposed lot contains 256 parking spaces and will be connected to the existing campus by a driveway to December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-G 2 the south, which aligns with a main campus driveway connecting to Colonel Glenn Road. The existing parking will be redesigned to add appropriate handicapped spaces since the topography of the new site cannot provide the additional required handicapped spaces. The proposal also includes a driveway location on Bowman Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered. The area to the south is the campus of the Baptist School of Nursing. The area to the west is a large mobile home park and the area to the east is vacant. To the north is also predominately vacant land with a scattering of homes on acreage adjacent to Bowman Road. South of site, across Colonel Glenn Road is a newly developing commercial center with an automobile dealership, a movie theater and a fast food restaurant soon to be constructed. Southwest of the site, adjacent to Colonel Glenn Road is a POD zoned site which has developed as an office/showroom/warehouse development. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners concerning the proposed development. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, 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. Bowman Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirement of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Due to limited site distance and close driveway spacing, no additional driveway will be allowed. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-G 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A separate connection for the sprinkler meter to serve this area will be required unless this property is combined with the existing property to form a single parcel. 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 northernmost interior landscape island must be increased to at least 300 square feet in area. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a construction permit, it will be necessary to provide approved landscaping plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this 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: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Frank Riggins was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request was for a zoning site plan review to allow Baptist School of Nursing to December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-G 4 place a parking lot on the site. Staff questioned if the lot would remain as an individual lot or if the area would become a part of the existing Baptist property. Mr. Riggins stated he would contact the owner and provide staff with the information. Staff also noted any additional site lighting must be low level in intensity and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned property. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the driveway proposed on Bowman Road should be removed. Staff stated there were sight distance problems and the proposed driveway did not meet access and circulation requirements of the City’s ordinances. Mr. Riggins questioned if a right-in/right- out drive would be allowed. Staff suggested Mr. Riggins contact Traffic Engineering to resolve the issue. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the northernmost interior landscape island should be increased to at least 300 square feet in area to receive credit on fulfilling the ordinance requirement. Staff also noted irrigation would be required on all landscape 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 addressing the issues raised at the November 6, 2003, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has not removed the requested driveway located on the northern portion of the new lot. The applicant has met with Traffic Engineering and has resolved to their satisfaction all the concerns and outstanding issues related to the driveway location and site distance concerns. The applicant has submitted details concerning the location of the drive with regard to grades and the curve location related to the drive. Staff recommends that at the time of grading, if staff is agreeable there is not a sight distance problem, the applicant will be allowed a full service drive. If there are sight distance problems, the applicant will be allowed a right-in/left-in/right-out drive. Staff is comfortable the location of the drive will not cause any future problems related to future development of adjoining properties if maintained at the requested location. The applicant has indicated all requested revisions to the interior landscaping. All landscape islands will be constructed per the ordinance requirements or at least 300 square feet in area. The applicant has also indicated irrigation will be provided to water landscaped areas. The revised site plan indicates the lots will be recombined into a single lot. This will resolve Central Arkansas Water’s concern related to the placement of water meters. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-G 5 The site is currently zoned C-2 which requires a zoning site plan review. The applicant has met the intent of the ordinance and is requesting one variance from the minimum driveway spacing criteria. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The proposed development of the site as a parking lot to serve an existing development 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 request to allow a reduced driveway spacing from the property line for the drive along Bowman Road subject to staff review and approval as outlined in paragraph H of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Frank Riggins was present representing the request. Staff stated the John Barrow Neighborhood Association had indicated support of the proposed site plan review subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the staff report. 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 request to allow a reduced driveway spacing from the property line for the drive along Bowman Road subject to staff review and approval as outlined in paragraph H of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-3968-B NAME: Chelsea Square Revised PR-D LOCATION: 2111 Hinson Road #1 DEVELOPER: Wm. B. Hearnsberger, Inc. 26901 Highway 10 Roland, AR 72135 ENGINEER: Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.11 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Single-family residence (the addition of a sunroom) VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The site was zoned PD-R in March 1983 as Phase I of an approximately 18 acre proposed patio home subdivision. Phase II was not constructed and the PD-R zoning was revoked and later secured for the existing Carmel Valley Subdivision. The site December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3968-B 2 (Chelsea Square) contains approximately 20 units and 3.5 acres. A revision to the PD- R was approved on November 17, 1992, (Ordinance No. 16,303) to allow a reduced building line for Lots 2 and 3. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved PD-R to allow the construction of a sunroom on Lot 1 of the Chelsea Square Subdivision. The original plan indicated building envelopes. The proposed sunroom addition is outside the previously set building envelopes therefore, the PD-R would have to be revised to allow the construction. The applicant has also indicated on the site plan an at grade patio in the rear yard area. The applicant has indicated this will not be constructed at this time but is requesting the patio for possible future construction. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located on the North side of Hinson Road in the curve immediately west of Pulaski Academy School. There are detached single-family homes located to the east and southeast of the site with zero lot line single-family homes located to the west, northwest and north of the site. The site has developed with patio homes through a PD-R to allow reduced setbacks. There is a six-foot brick fence along Hinson Road; the subdivision is a gated community. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed development. The Marlowe Manor Property Owners Association, the Hillsborough Property Owners Association and the Pleasant Valley Property Owners 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: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3968-B 3 Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment 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 for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision of a Planned Residential Development for the addition of a sunroom and patio. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: No comment. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Plan does not list any goals, objective or action statements relevant to this case. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) The applicant was not present. Staff noted the proposed request was a revision to an existing PD-R to allow the addition of a sunroom to an existing single-family home. Staff stated the request was necessary to allow the construction since building envelopes were indicated on the approved plan. Staff noted there were no outstanding issues associated with the request. There being no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The request is to allow the construction of an approximately 300 square foot sunroom to the rear of an existing single-family home. The home contains an existing deck, which will be removed to allow the construction of the sunroom. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3968-B 4 The previous approval included buildable areas or building envelopes on the proposed site plan. To allow an increase in the building envelope it is necessary to revise the PD-R to allow the construction. Staff feels the proposed addition will have minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining property owners. Screening is not an issue with the site. Adjacent to the applicant’s property is a six-foot brick fence and the property to the south has a solid wall adjacent to the proposed construction area. The applicant has also indicated an at-grade patio, which will not be constructed at this time. The patio addition is proposed as 14-feet by 22-feet and will be constructed in the rear yard. Staff is supportive of the future construction of the patio area. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant 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 and 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 for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-4343-N NAME: The Ranch Tract F Revised PCD LOCATION: on the northeast corner of Ranch Drive and Chenonceau Boulevard DEVELOPER: Ranch Properties 900 South Shackleford, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 5.24 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Mix of Office and Commercial Uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Mix of office and commercial uses - the creation of a plat to follow previously approved phasing lines VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat variances – the creation of lots without public street frontage Lots 6, 7 and 8. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-N 2 BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 16,957 adopted September 5, 1995, established Saddle Creek Center “PCD” located at 6301 Ranch Drive (Tract F – The Ranch). The approval included the development of the site with multiple buildings containing a mix of 50% C-2 retail type uses and 50% O-3 permitted uses. The applicant indicated the lots would be phased resulting in the construction of three buildings totaling 26,550 square feet of floor space along with 131 parking spaces in Phase I. Phase II would contain an additional 33,600 square feet of floor space and 137 parking spaces. The applicant indicated the development would be completed in two (2) years. Lots 1 – 5 of Tract F have been final platted. The lots contained in the previously approved PCD that have been final platted are Lots 3,4 and 5. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now requesting to plat each individual building as a separate lot. The applicant is requesting four lots (Lots 6 – 9) and a site plan review of the proposed buildings on Lots 6 – 8. Each of the lots will contain a building of approximately 6,000 square feet and 30 plus parking spaces. The applicant has indicated the development will maintain a 50/50 mix of office and commercial uses. The applicant has also indicated Lot 9 will be submitted for review when a development is secured. Lot 6 will contain approximately 0.63 acres, Lot 7 will contain approximately 0.78 acres and Lot 8 will contain approximately 0.80 acres. Lot 9 is the larger lot and is proposed to contain approximately 3.03 acres. The development of the plat will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance. Three of the lots will be created as lots without public street frontage. The applicant has indicated a twenty-seven foot access easement to serve the lots. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and is mostly cleared of trees. The terrain is, for all practical purposes, level. A drainage channel runs along the north boundary of the site. The current zoning of the site is PCD. There is C-3 zoned property located to the north and west of the site; also vacant. The area to the northwest is zoned MF- 18 and was recently reviewed and approved for a multiple building site plan review for an apartment development. The area to the north of the site is zoned R-2, Single-family with a Conditional Use Permit for Arkansas Baptist School and their sports complex. The area to the east of the site contains several buildings of office uses. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-N 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners concerning the proposed development. The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Maywood Manor 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. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Easements are required around the perimeter of the site and along Ranch Drive. Contact SBC at 373-5112 for additional details. 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. 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. A water main extension to each lot and on-site private fire hydrants on each lot that does not have a public fire hydrant available for fire protection, will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-N 4 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 Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision of a Planned Commercial Development to plat lots following previously approved phasing lines. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: Areas of the proposed northeastern land use buffer width is less than the nine (9) foot minimum allowed by the zoning ordinance and the six (6) foot nine (9) inch width minimum allowed by the landscape ordinance. The full width required by the zoning ordinance, without transfers, is twenty (20) 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 northeastern perimeter of the site. Interior landscaping islands must be at least 300 square feet in area to receive credit as interior landscaping. 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. 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. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the request indicating the request was a revision to an existing PCD to allow the previously approved phasing lines to become lot lines. Staff noted the creation of the plat would require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-N 5 Staff suggested the applicant consider a cross access parking agreement to avoid any potential problems. Staff noted the applicant had indicated the service drive as a cross access easement. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted sidewalks would be required to be replaced prior to occupancy. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the buffer located along the northeastern perimeter did not meet ordinance requirement. Staff stated the minimum required by the zoning ordinance would be nine (9) feet and the minimum allowed by the landscape ordinance would be six (6) foot nine (9) inches. Staff also noted interior islands should be increased to 300 square feet in area to receive credit as interior landscaping. 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 November 6, 2003, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is proposing the construction of individual buildings on separate lots. Two of the buildings are estimated to contain approximately 6,000 square feet with the third building being considered containing approximately 6,655 square feet. The typical minimum parking required for a 6,000 square foot mixed use development would be 26 parking spaces and for a 6,655 square foot mixed use development the requirement would be 29 parking spaces (one space for every two hundred twenty-five square feet of gross floor area). The applicant has indicated a common access easement to serve the development but has not indicated a cross access parking agreement. The individual lots have adequate parking to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The applicant has indicated the service drive to be a minimum of 27- feet in width. This is consistent with the minimum width required per the Subdivision Ordinance for service drives. Staff is supportive of the requested common access drive to serve the development and the parking plan. The applicant has indicated the buffer along the northeast perimeter has been increased to the minimum nine feet required by the zoning ordinance. The applicant has also increased the interior landscaping islands to be a minimum of 300 square feet in area and has indicated a screening fence along the northern property line to provide screening to the adjacent residentially zoned property. The proposed landscaping meets the minimum typical requirement of the zoning ordinance. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping plan. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-N 6 Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The applicant is requesting to plat individual lots following previously approved phasing lines. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation and the use mix will remain the same as was previously approved (50/50 mix of office and commercial uses). The proposed plan meets the typical minimum requirements of the landscape ordinance and the zoning ordinance with regard to landscape strips and buffers. The proposal also includes sufficient parking to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The applicant has requested a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage (Section 31-231). Proposed Lots 6 – 8 will not have direct access to Ranch Drive but will be served by a twenty-seven foot access easement. Staff is supportive of the variance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage. Staff feels the proposed access easement will serve the development. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The proposed request to revise the previously approved site plan to include the placement of lot lines following previously approved phasing lines should have no adverse impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered 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 presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-4712-A NAME: Malmstrom Commercial Center Short-form PCD LOCATION: 11619 Kanis Road DEVELOPER: Malmstrom White Company 11610 Kanis Road Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: Roberts and Williams Associates 1501 North University Avenue, Suite 430 Little Rock, AR 72207 AREA: 2.09 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-3 and MF-18 ALLOWED USES: General Retail and Multi-family at a density of 18 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: C-3 uses and a contactors office and storage yard VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance – the creation of a lot without public street frontage. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 15,175 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 16, 1986, rezoned the site from R-2, Single-family to C-3 and MF-18. (The north 400-feet was zoned to C-3 while the southern 590 feet was zoned MF-18.) The applicant December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4712-A 2 indicated the rezoning to C-3 would allow the existing non-conforming business to become a conforming use. The applicant felt it unlikely the southern portion would develop as single-family and requested multi-family zoning. The Planning Commission reviewed a site plan for the C-3 zoned portion of the site for the placement of multiple buildings on the tract at their October 31, 2002, Public Hearing. The item was approved on the Consent Agenda. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from C-3 and MF-18 to Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to allow the creation of a two (2) lot plat. The applicant has indicated Lot 1 will be utilized as C-3 allowable uses maintaining twenty percent of the gross floor area as office uses and Lot 2 will be developed as a contractor’s office and storage yard. The applicant is requesting C-3 uses as alternative uses for Lot 2. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. The rear lot (Lot 2) will gain access through a 26-foot common access and utility easement. The site will share a cross access and parking agreement between the two (2) lots. The applicant proposes upon completion three buildings will occupy Lot 1. Currently there is a building containing 4,145 square feet and a building under construction containing 6,100 square feet. The applicant has indicated future construction of a third building also containing 6,100 square feet. Lot 2 will be developed with a 6,100 square foot building proposed to function as a contactor’s office with a proposed contractor’s equipment storage yard along the rear property line. The applicant has indicated a 30-foot open space buffer along the southern property line, adjacent to POD zoned property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently zoned C-3 and MF-18 and contains three non-residential structures on the front portion of the site. The building closest to Kanis Road was the former home to Terminix and the structure in the rear (a converted single- family home) serves as an office to a construction contractor. The third building is currently under construction located on the west property line just south of the Terminix building and is the future site to Sea, Inc., a hazardous chemical recovery firm. Kanis Road has not been improved in this area. The roadway is a two lane road with open ditches for drainage. Other uses in the area include a mixture of residential and non-residential uses. Immediately east of the site are three converted single-family homes now serving as office uses. Immediately west of the site is a single-family home and a large non-residential building, used by an December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4712-A 3 upholstery shop, in the front yard of the residence. North of the site are single- family homes and office uses. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents 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 meets Master Street Plan requirements. For boundary street improvements, this project qualifies for a contribution in- lieu of construction. 2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 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: A 10-foot utility easement is required along the western perimeter of the site. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details. 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. An 8-inch water main extension with a private hydrant located on Lot 2 will be required in order to provide service to Lot 2. Relocation of the landscape area to the north line of Lot 2 would provide a place to install the fire hydrant in a satisfactory location. A 15-foot-wide utility easement will be required to accommodate the proposed water line extension. This development will have December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4712-A 4 minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 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 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 office and commercial uses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: Interior landscaping islands must be adjusted to provide landscaping strips at least six (6) feet nine (9) inches in width along each side of the interior property lines. A six (6) foot high opaque screen is required along the eastern and western perimeters of the site. This screen may be either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings. 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. 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. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Barry Williams and Mr. Chris Massey were present representing the applicant. Staff presented the request indicating to Mr. Williams additional items necessary to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation for the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4712-A 5 Mr. Williams indicated the applicant was requesting to modify the site plan slightly. He stated the applicant was requesting to increase the rear storage holding area. Mr. Williams stated the site would maintain the proposed 30-foot open space buffer along the southern perimeter. Mr. Williams stated the storage area would be paved and completely fenced continuing the fence to the back of the holding area. Staff questioned the placement of the landscape island and requested the island be moved to accommodate a fire hydrant needed to serve Lot 2. Mr. Williams stated he would review the placement. He stated the island had been placed in the shown location to accommodate the garbage truck. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the in-lieu payment had been made. Staff stated the payment would need to be rededicated to continue the ten year commitment. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted a utility easement could not count as a required land use buffer. Staff noted the properties on the east and west were still zoned residentially and a minimum six feet nine inch wide buffer would be required. Staff noted the buffers may be deemed unnecessary by the Planning Commission due to adjoining uses. Staff noted a screen would be required long the eastern and western perimeters. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. The applicant has also indicated the increased area for the contractor’s storage yard area and an area designated for on-site detention. The area will abut a designated undisturbed open space along the southern perimeter of the property. The applicant has modified the placement of the landscape island to allow for the placement of a fire hydrant to serve Lot 2. The interior islands have been placed in the parking area as required by the landscape ordinance and are at least three hundred square feet in area. The applicant has indicated a landscaping strip along the eastern perimeter of Lot 1 but the area is located within a required easement. The applicant will be required to submit a request to the City Beautiful Commission to allow the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4712-A 6 easement to serve as the required landscape strip per the landscape ordinance. The applicant is also requesting the Planning Commission allow the easement to count toward fulfilling the land use buffer requirement. Staff is supportive of this request. Plantings will be placed in the easement at the rate required for the land use buffer. Since the easement will be used as a water line easement to serve Lot 2, staff feels it is unlikely the landscaping will be disturbed. Should the landscaping be disturbed, the applicant will be required to replant the strip to meet ordinance requirements. The applicant has also indicated screening along the eastern perimeter of Lot 2 located outside the easement. The placement fulfills the requirements of the zoning ordinance and the landscape ordinance. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed along the western perimeter of the site. Evergreen shrubs will be placed behind the buildings for screening and along the contractor’s storage yard a six foot wood fence with its face side directed outward will be used. The applicant is requesting a two lot plat as a component of the PCD. The plat will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lot 2 to develop as a lot without public street frontage (Section 31-231). The applicant is requesting C-3 uses as alternative uses for the site. The proposed lot sizes meet the minimum requirements for C-3 zoned property or 14,000 square feet. Staff is supportive of the request. The applicant has indicated reestablishment of the existing in-lieu payment for the road construction of Kanis Road. Staff is supportive of this request. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the proposed request to rezone the site to PCD and allow the site to develop as a two lot plat should have minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining property owners. 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 from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lot 2 to develop as a lot without public street frontage. Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow the landscape/buffer strip along the eastern perimeter to be located within a utility easement. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4712-A 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the John Barrow Neighborhood Association had indicated support of the proposed rezoning request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined by staff. 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 from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lot 2 to develop as a lot without public street frontage. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance to allow the landscape/buffer strip along the eastern perimeter to be located within a utility easement. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: LU03-18-03 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District Location: 15500 Chenal Parkway Request: Suburban Office to Commercial Source: Joe White, White-Daters & Associates PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Suburban Office 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. The applicant wishes to build an automobile dealership. Staff is not expanding the application since a land use review is a part of a Neighborhood Action Plan currently being updated. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is mostly vacant land with a few small buildings located on the curve of Kanis Road currently zoned O-2 Office and Institutional and is about 13.5 acres ± in size. The land in the median of Chenal Parkway is zoned PR - Parks and Recreation while the north side of Chenal Parkway is vacant land zoned C-3 General Commercial. The houses in the subdivision east of the applicant’s property are zoned R-2 Single Family. A strip of vacant land along the north side of Kanis Road is zoned O-2. The south side of Kanis Road consist of vacant land zoned O-2. The neighboring land to the west consists of a business zoned R-2 on the north side of Kanis Road and a house built on a large lot south of Kanis Road. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On June 17, 2003, multiple changes were made from Office, Single Family, and Multifamily to Multifamily and Low Density Residential for an area north of Chenal Parkway and south of Rahling Road about 1/3 of a mile northwest of the study area to accommodate proposed development and recognize existing conditions. On April 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family, Multifamily, and Park / Open Space to Community Shopping at Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-03 2 starting over ¾ of a mile to the west of the application area to accommodate proposed development. On January 4, 2000 a change was made form Office to Mixed Office Commercial at 15500 Chenal Parkway across the street north of the applicant’ property to accommodate proposed development. On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Office to Mixed Office Commercial on Chenal Parkway east of Kirk Road about ¼ of a mile west of the application area to accommodate proposed development. On March 2, 1999 multiple changes were made from Low Density Residential, Transition, and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family, Low Density Residential, Single Family, Suburban Office, and Mixed Office Commercial along Kanis Road within one mile east of the property in question to recognize existing conditions. The applicant’s property is shown as Suburban Office on the Future Land Use Plan. The median of Chenal Parkway is shown as Park / Open Space while the land to the north is shown as Commercial. The land to the east is shown as Single Family with a small strip of Suburban Office shown on the north side of Kanis Road. The south side of Kanis Road is shown as Suburban Office. To the west, a strip of Park / Open Space is shown along the floodway of Rock Creek while Commercial is shown further to the west at the intersection of Kanis Road with Chenal Parkway. MASTER STREET PLAN: Chenal Parkway is shown as a Principal Arterial built with a four-lane Parkway cross section as required by ordinance. Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial and is built as a rural two-lane road. Kanis Road needs improvement in order to conform to the Master Street Plan standards for Minor Arterials. A Class I bikeway is shown for Chenal Parkway from Bowman Road to State Highway 10. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 show a Potential Greenbelt along Rock Creek in the median of Chenal Parkway. The plan is to develop the median of Chenal Parkway as a linear park and will include the construction of the Class I bikeway shown on the Master Street Plan. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-03 3 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 listed an action statement that recommends the aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to influence more neighborhood-friendly and better quality development. ANALYSIS: This amendment would increase the area shown for Commercial uses along Chenal Parkway at the expense of areas available for office developments. A change to Commercial at this location is a further break with the original Rock Creek Parkway (now Chenal) plan, which recommended office and multifamily use along this portion of Chenal Parkway (formerly Rock Creek Parkway). The original land use pattern for the area placed low intensity land use patterns along Chenal Parkway (formerly Rock Creek Parkway) and the more intense land uses away from Rock Creek. This change would further intensify land development along the Rock Creek portion of Chenal Parkway. The primary purpose of the areas shown as Park / Open Space in the vicinity of the applicant’s property is to protect the integrity of Rock Creek. The strip of PK/OS shown along the banks of Rock Creek provides a buffer between the more intense uses west of Rock Creek from the less intense uses to the east. Development of the applicant’s property would need to be done in a manner that would minimize any run-off towards Rock Creek with the goal of preserving the ecological and hydrological integrity of the Rock Creek. This change would introduce a use in an area that is incompatible with neighboring uses. Any non-residential development of this site needs to be compatible with the adjacent residential properties. If this amendment were approved, the Planned Zoning Development process governing the development of the applicant’s property should be required. If a proposed development has design characteristics that are incompatible with residential properties, potential negative impacts from non-residential development could be minimized if the PZD process governed future proposals. The current Suburban Office category would allow non-residential development to take place at this location under the PZD process. The development of the property should be minimized in size dimensions and avoid the mass and bulk typical of commercial developments that are incompatible with neighboring residential uses. The development of the property with Suburban Office uses with a PZD increases the likelihood that the negative impacts of size, mass and bulk of development would be minimized. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-03 4 Any development of the applicant’s property would require access that may affect the flow of traffic on Chenal and Kanis, and would need to be designed in a manner, which would minimize any potential disruptions. The applicant’s property is situated to benefit from double frontage along two arterials. Chenal Parkway is intended to have a daily traffic count of 25,000 vehicles per day, while Kanis road is intended to have a daily traffic count of 18,000 vehicles per day. Principal Arterials are intended to serve through traffic on a regional level, while Minor Arterials are intended to serve through traffic at a more local level. The proposed change, along with vacant areas shown as Commercial, and the possibility of commercial development in vacant areas shown as Mixed Office Commercial could result in a corridor of commercial development along Chenal Parkway from the intersection of Wellington Hills Road to the western intersection of Kanis Road west of Kirk Road. The removal of Suburban Office could reduce the area of land available for the development of small-scale offices and increase the intensity of office development in areas, which would remain for quite office uses. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Gibraltar/Pt. West/Timber Ridge, Parkway Place Property Owners Association, Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association, Carriage Creek Property Owners Association, St Charles Property Owners Association, SW Little Rock UP, and WCLR Coalition of Neighborhoods. Staff has received one comment from area residents. The comment received was opposed to the change. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This change is incompatible with the uses to the east. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 2003) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 29, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent, and 1 recuse. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 13.1 FILE NO.: Z-4841-B NAME: Pinnacle Ford Long-form PCD LOCATION: South of Chenal Parkway, east of the Kanis Road intersection DEVELOPER: Pinnacle Ford 11200 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 13.5 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-2 ALLOWED USES: Office and Institutional District PROPOSED ZONING: PCD and O-2 PROPOSED USE: Automobile dealership for Lot 1 and Lot 2 remaining undeveloped at this time and zoned O-2 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: In June 1987, two rezoning application, Z-4840 and Z-4841 were filed for a portion of the land under consideration. The initial request involved 12.1 acres and a second added five acres for a total of 17 acres. One request was for an O-3 reclassification, December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 2 and the other one requested a change to O-3 and C-3. Z-4840 was withdrawn without prejudice, and Z-4841, the O-3 proposal was denied by the Planning Commission. Ordinance No. 15,552 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 6, 1988, reclassified the property from R-2, Single-family to O-2, Office and Institutional District. The adopted ordinance also placed restrictions on the development of the tract. The site was to have a 33-foot landscaped or undisturbed buffer along the Rock Creek Parkway; a 35-foot height limit for buildings; one access point on the Rock Creek Parkway; and a 40-foot minimum building setback from the property line on the Rock Creek Parkway side. The developer indicated the development would be constructed as an “attractive office park”. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from O-2, Office and Institutional District to Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to allow the site to develop with two (2) lots, one containing an automobile dealership and the second lot remaining zoned O-2. Lot 1 will contain 11.49 acres and Lot 2 will contain 2.0 acres. Pinnacle Ford is requesting to develop Lot 1 for their new car and used car operations. At present there are no development plans for Lot 2, which would be developed and final platted at a later date. The applicant is requesting a two year deferral of street improvements to Kanis Road for Lot 1. The applicant has indicated street improvements to Kanis Road for Lot 2 will be constructed with the final platting of the lot. The applicant has indicated two structures will be constructed on Lot 1. One will house the new car showroom and service areas and contains up to 31,400 square feet. The building also contains “hospitality zones” such as children’s play area, customer work area with phone access, laptop stations, desktops etc., and a café for customers while waiting (not food service). The other building is for pre-owned vehicle sales and clean-up and contains approximately 3,600 square feet. Other development considerations included by the applicant are all exterior lighting will be focused inward to minimize or eliminate ambient light into adjacent neighborhoods, there will be no outside paging allowed at the dealership and there will be no off-loading of vehicles in the public right-of-way. The applicant has indicated a 100-foot buffer along the east side of proposed Lot 1 with the area to be set aside as an undisturbed buffer adjacent to the residential property. There are no development plans for Lot 2 which is proposed to remain zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 3 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The western portion of the site is vacant and cleared with trees remaining on the site along the eastern perimeter. The site is relatively flat with roadway access to both Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road. Chenal Parkway in this area is a divided roadway with the two eastbound lanes adjacent to the site. Kanis Road is an unimproved narrow road with open ditches for drainage. To the east of the site is a fully developed single-family neighborhood, Wood Creek. To the north of the site is the divided parkway with C-2 zoned property located to the north. The area to the south of the site is vacant O-2 zoned property abutting Pride Valley Road extending to the west. A PCD is located southwest of the site which is currently an agriculture nursery. West of the site is Rock Creek with Kinco Construction Company buildings located on the western bank of the creek. Other uses in the area include a PD-C approved (construction has not taken place) for Parker Saturn automobile dealership located on the corner of Wellington Hills Road and Chenal Parkway, a church, a PCD for a home improvement store and a vacant C-3 zoned tract. The Kroger shopping center, also zoned PCD, is located on the southwest corner of Chenal Parkway and the current Kanis Road intersection. The Master Street Plan indicates Kanis Road turning north along the western boundary of the Kinco property to align with Wellington Hills Road. Kanis Road adjacent to this site is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls and letters of opposition to the proposed development. The Parkway Place Property Owners Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge 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. In addition a neighborhood meeting was held November 11, 2003 at the Parkway Place Baptist Church. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed right-of-way dedication on Kanis Road meets the minor arterial standard. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 4 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. Traffic Engineering comments are as follows: - Driveway needs to be designed according to Chenal Master Plan Standards - Driveway taper needs to be 150-feet 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities. Submit cross sections demonstrating compliance with the terracing provisions of the land alteration ordinance. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location of storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 6. Hauling of fill material on or off the site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 7. The eastern-most driveway location does not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The drive can be moved west to 150-feet from proposed Lot 2 or can share a single driveway with Lot 2. 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: A 20-foot easement behind the new right-of-way line for relocation of existing 3Ø overhead power line. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details. 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 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 the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 5 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: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a car dealership. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda (Item #13 – File No. LU03-18-03). Landscape: The proposed western land use buffer is less than the fifty (50) foot average width requirement of the zoning ordinance. 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. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies 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 approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible on this site. Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 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 listed an action statement that recommends the aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to influence more neighborhood- friendly and better quality development. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 6 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Tim Daters and Mr. Gary Dean were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development indicating the site would require an amendment to the City’s Future Land Use Plan. Staff noted there were additional items needed to complete the review of the proposed development. Staff questioned the applicant’s intent with regard to the median. The applicant indicated they would not request the median be cleared as a part of the Master Parks Plan. Staff questioned placement of any proposed dumpsters, where the delivery of automobiles would be taken, the location of the service shop, the hours deliveries would be taken and if there would be an on-site auto body repair shop. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted special grading permits would be required prior to development. Staff also noted the storm water detention ordinance applied to the property. Staff requested the applicant relocate the driveway along Kanis Road to the west to 150-feet or to share a drive with proposed Lot 2. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the western land use buffer was less than the fifty foot average width required per the zoning ordinance. Staff also noted a six foot high opaque screen would be required along the eastern and western perimeters. Mr. Dean questioned if the 100-foot buffer would suffice for the required screening. Staff stated if the buffer remained evergreen, then the area would meet the requirement, otherwise the applicant would be required to plant shrubs in this area to provide the year around screening. Mr. Dean commented the property located to the west was zoned residentially but was not being used as a residential use. Staff noted the Planning Commission could deem the required screening unnecessary. Staff noted the required screening to the west was a fifty foot average. Staff also noted screening would be required adjacent to proposed Lot 2. 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 a few of the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the location of the proposed dumpster and the required screening. The proposed dumpster is to be located adjacent to the proposed 100-foot December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 7 undisturbed buffer. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed on three sides as required by the zoning ordinance at least two feet above the top of the container. The applicant has indicated there will not be a body shop at this site. The applicant has indicated the parts and service hours of operation from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 8:00 am to 4:00 pm Saturday. The sales hours of operation are proposed from 8:00 am to 8:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 9:00 am to 7:00 pm Saturday and Sunday. The applicant has indicated 125 customer and employee parking spaces, 56 service parking spaces and 419 display spaces. One hundred of the employee and customer parking spaces are around the new car showroom, which is adjacent to the proposed 100-foot buffer. This area has separate gates for security to be closed during non-business hours. The applicant has also indicated a gates at all entrances to limit activity on the site when the business is not open. The gates are proposed as steel gates located across each drive of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway. The applicant has not relocated the driveway along Kanis Road. The applicant has indicated with the drive at the shown location there is a “straight shot” to the service shop for customer traffic and for delivery of automobiles. The driveway does not meet the minimum requirement for driveway spacing per city ordinances. In addition, the proposed street construction along Chenal Parkway does not meet the Chenal Parkway street design criteria established through Ordinance Numbers 16,622 and 16,652. The applicant has indicated signage on Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road. The proposed signage will comply with the Chenal Parkway Design Overlay District requirement for a monument style sign not to exceed eight feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. There is also a ground mounted monument sign proposed for Kanis Road. The applicant has indicated this sign will also comply with the Chenal Overlay requirements. The site plan includes a tract of O-2 zoned property. Through the PCD the applicant is requesting the subdivision of this tract but is requesting the parcel remain zoned O-2. The proposed lot meets the minimum requirement for the O- 2 zoning classification. The applicant is proposing the placement of 11.23 percent of the site including a 1.29 acre buffer along the eastern perimeter of the site as interior landscaping. The applicant has indicated the screening will be zoned OS too ensure the vitality of the area. The applicant has also indicated should the 100-foot buffer not provide year around screening additional plantings will be installed. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 8 Staff is not supportive of the proposed request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. The site adjoins a single-family neighborhood to the east and an elementary school is located in close proximity to the southeast. Currently the infrastructure is not in place to allow customers traveling west bound to access the site. The applicant has indicated customers will access the site from Kanis Road, which staff questions. Staff also has concerns with the delivery of automobiles, both the logistics of how the automobiles will be delivered and the hours the automobiles will be delivered. The applicant has not indicated the proposed delivery hours. Staff also has concerns with the location where deliveries will be taken. Currently staff has problems with automobile dealers in the general area taking deliveries in the right-of-way. The site is adjacent to two principal arterials and delivery in the right-of-way would be extremely dangerous. Kanis Road is a two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage, Chenal Parkway is a four lane road with a median but is well traveled. Staff feels allowing the use to locate on the site will invite cut-through traffic through the existing Wood Creek Subdivision. Staff has concerns of the noise from the site. The applicant has indicated there will be no outdoor paging as a part of the development but there are other noises that the site will generate. The applicant has indicated a repair shop to be located on the site. The shop will potentially hold twenty-eight cars waiting for service and the applicant has indicated an area for express service with a potential for eight cars. Staff feels this would generate a large amount of noise from impact wrenches and traffic moving around the site. The applicant has requested a two year deferral of the required street improvements to Kanis Road. Staff is not supportive of this request. If the site is developed with a heavy commercial use (a C-4 commercial use) staff feels the street improvements should be put in place at the time of development. The applicant has indicated Kanis Road will be used to access the site for service and for the off-loading of inventory. As stated, staff is not supportive of the proposed request. Staff feels the rezoning of this site to a commercial classification will encourage additional commercial development in the area. The Parkway has commercial uses at each end and along the divided median the area is predominately residential. Staff feels this should remain the case with the office zoning providing a transition between the single-family homes to the east and the non-conforming commercial use located across Rock Creek. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the proposed request. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4841-B 9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were several registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested this item be deferred to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-5038-H NAME: Seven Acres Business Park Revised POD LOCATION: On the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Seven Acres Business Drive DEVELOPER: Bank of Little Rock 200 North State Street Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 2.60 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Office/Showroom/Warehouse PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: Two Lot Plat – O-1 Quiet Office Uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-H 2 BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors by Ordinance No. 16,319, adopted on December 15, 1992, established the Seven Acres Business Park containing four lots This followed a recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 1992. The approved POD allowed office/showroom/warehouse uses on all lots except Lot 1. The building on Lot 1 was to be used for accessory commercial uses. On February 20, 1996, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,118, amending the POD to allow the Golden Collision Center (auto repair business) to be constructed on Lot 4. An Alltel cellular tower and Comcast cable equipment building were approved for placement on Lot 4 at a later date. On July 7, 1998, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,764 amending the site plan for Lots 1 and 2. The office, showroom/warehouse building for Lot 2 was increased to 17,114 square feet in area and the revised plan maintained the 50 foot landscape buffer along the west property line. On December 20, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 18,161 amending the site plan for Lot 2. Lot 2 was subdivided into two lots with separate buildings on each lot. The total area for the two buildings was 12,816 square feet, a decrease from 17,764 square feet that was previously approved for Lot 2. The 50-foot wide landscape area along the west property line was maintained. The Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to revise the previously approved site plan for Lot 1 only on January 3, 2002. The applicant proposed to develop Lot 1 of Seven Acres Business Park with an office/commercial development. The development would have consisted of all office uses facing Cantrell Road and a mini-storage development to the rear. The applicant proposed mini-storage in four separate buildings ranging from 20 feet x 150 feet to 20 feet x 185 feet. The site also contained a resident manager office and apartment (1880 square feet) for the mini- storage facility. There were 42 parking spaces proposed as a part of the development. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to split Lot 1 of the Seven Acres Business Park into two separate parcels. Each individual lot will contain a building to be used as an office use. Lot 1A will contain a bank building with drive-through lanes and Lot 1B will contain a mortgage company. The applicant has indicated O-1, Quiet Office District uses as alternate uses for each lot. Lot 1A is proposed at 1.11 acres with a proposed building square footage of 2,888 with a proposed expansion area of 2,598. The applicant has indicated 38 parking spaces on the lot. The maximum building height proposed is 25.0 feet. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-H 3 Lot 1B is proposed at 1.30 acres and building square footage of 3,975 and a 2,601 square foot expansion area. The applicant has indicated 53 parking spaces to be contained on Lot 1B. The maximum building height proposed for Lot 1B is also 25.0 feet. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from 8:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Saturday. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The proposed site is vacant and cleared with only a few trees on the site. All the lots within the Seven Acres Subdivision, with the exception of this lot, have developed. The uses include; an auto collusion repair business, an office/warehouse showroom and an office building with two suites. There is a wireless communication facility tower located on the south property line of this site. Other uses in the area include single-family residences immediately to the west of the site along Bella Rosa Drive and Cantrell Road to the north. There is a landscaping nursery to the east of the site. A creek and floodway are located along the south property line of this subdivision. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All property owners within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and the Westchester Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, staff has received no comment from the neighborhood. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinance and the Master Street Plan. 2. Storm Water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 3. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. It should be noted while the current map shows most of the property to be out of the floodplain, the map elevations indicate most of the property to be located in the floodplain. 4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-H 4 5. Hauling of fill material on or off the site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 6. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Two driveways would be acceptable on Seven Acres, provided no access is taken from Cantrell Road. The width of the driveway must not exceed 36-feet. 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: A 10-foot easements is required for 1Ø or 3Ø underground service. A 30-foot easement is required for 1Ø or 3Ø overhead service. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: A ten foot easement is requested around the perimeter of the site. Contact SBC at 373-5112 for additional details. 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 Lot 1B. 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. 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 the 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-H 5 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development for a new bank and mortgage office. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: The average widths of the proposed landscape buffers along the southern and western perimeters are less than the twenty five (25) foot average width required by the Highway 10 Overlay District. The southern landscape buffer is 2,411 square feet less than this requirement. The western landscape strip is 583 square feet less than this requirement. Areas set aside for landscaping meet with landscape ordinance requirements and normal zoning buffer 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 western perimeter of the site. An irrigation system is required to water landscaped areas. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff noted the request was to split an existing lot through the planned development process. Staff noted there were additional items necessary to complete the review. Staff requested Mr. McGetrick relocate the dumpster located on Lot 1A away from the street. Staff also requested Mr. McGetrick indicate the drive as a cross access and utility easement. Staff noted the proposed parking was more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand for an office development. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-H 6 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff requested the driveway location proposed for Lot 1B access to Cantrell Road be removed. Staff stated the frontage did not allow for a driveway per the current ordinances. Staff stated two drives located on Seven Acres Drive were acceptable. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the southern and western perimeter landscaping strip were less than the twenty-five foot average width required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay requirement. Mr. McGetrick stated he felt the required buffer could be achieved through reducing the proposed expansion area. Staff stated the western perimeter abutted single-family zoned property and screening would be required. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has removed the driveway on Cantrell Road and relocated the dumpster away from the street. The applicant has indicated one dumpster location to be located on a shared easement located on the rear lot line of Lots 1A and 1B. The applicant has also increased the landscaping along the western and southern perimeters. The proposed site plan indicates a landscaping strip along the western perimeter of seventeen and one-half feet with an overall average of twenty-five feet. The previously approved site plan included a fifty foot buffer in this area. Staff feels the reduced buffer will not affect the quality of life of nearby residents. The proposed buffer along with the drainage structure should allow for sufficient buffering along the western perimeter. The previous proposal included commercial uses on Lot 1. The proposed development is for O-1, Quiet Office uses. The proposed southern perimeter landscaping strip is twenty-two feet with an overall average of twenty-five feet. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed along the western perimeter where abutting single-family zoned property. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping. The applicant has indicated signage on the proposed site plan. The applicant has indicated a single-ground-mounted sign for each lot. The signs are proposed as a maximum of six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-H 7 The proposed site plan indicates Lot 1A to be approximately 1.11 acres and Lot 1B to be approximately 1.30 acres. Although the proposed acreage is not sufficient to meet the minimum requirement of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District staff is supportive of the proposed lots sizes. The applicant is not taking access from Cantrell Road, which allows for the site to meet the intent of the Highway 10 Overlay District “to minimize the number of curb cuts along Highway 10 so that the roadway will function at an efficient level of service”. In addition the site has developed as a small scale office development accessed from a single road into the development. The applicant has indicated 38 on-site parking spaces for Lot 1A and 53 on-site parking spaces for Lot 1B. The typical minimum parking demand for Lot 1A would be seven spaces with an additional six spaces required for the expansion area (total of thirteen spaces). The typical minimum parking demand for Lot 1B would be nine spaces with an additional six spaces for the expansion area (fifteen total spaces). The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 8:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Saturday. The proposed hours of operation are consistent with the uses in the area and should have minimal to no adverse impact on the area. Staff is supportive of the proposed hours of operation. The applicant has indicated all site lighting will be low level and directional, directed to the parking areas and not reflected into the adjacent neighborhoods. This is in keeping with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to revise the previously approved POD to allow two lots to develop with office uses. 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: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered 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 staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-5097-E Owner: Rivercity Energy Co., Inc. Applicant: G. Robert Hardin Location: Southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway Description: Lot 1R, Chenal Valley Commercial Addition, Phase 2 Area: 2.256 acres Request: Rezone from C-3 (with conditions) to C-3 Purpose: Future commercial development Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North – Utility sub-station, convenience store and undeveloped property (across Cantrell Road); zoned R-2 and C-3 South – Undeveloped; zoned C-3 East – Undeveloped; zoned C-3 West – Undeveloped (across Chenal Parkway); zoned C-3 A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Improvements currently pending for this intersection extend all the way to the edge of the existing right-of-way at this corner. The “sidewalk and utility easement” should be dedicated on this plat as right-of-way. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents located within 300 feet who could be identified, and the DuQuesne Place December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5097-E 2 and Aberdeen Court Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for C-3 General Commercial zoning for commercial development to remove the conditions of site plan review. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. E. STAFF ANALYSIS: On December 20, 1988, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 15,603 which rezoned this property from unclassified to “C-3” General Commercial District (with conditions). The conditions which the ordinance placed on the zoning are as follows: “Proposed development of the site shall be subject to site plan review by the Planning Commission. In addition, forty foot landscape strips parallel to and abutting Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway shall be provided and maintained by the owner.” Rivercity Energy Co., Inc., owners of the 2.256 acre tract at the southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway, are requesting to rezone the property from “C-3” General Commercial District (with conditions) to “C-3” General Commercial District. The rezoning is proposed for the future development of a branch bank and retail commercial. The property is currently undeveloped and tree-covered, with varying degrees of slope. The final plat for this property (Lot 1R, Chenal Valley Commercial Addition, Phase 2) shows a 100 foot platted building line along the north (Cantrell Road) property line and a 50 foot platted building line along the west (Chenal Parkway) property line. There is an access easement extending from the northeast corner of the property, along the east and south property lines, to the southwest corner of the property. Access to December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5097-E 3 this property and the property to the south will be via this access easement. The general area contains a large amount of undeveloped property, zoned commercial, office and multifamily. There is a utility sub-station (Entergy), a convenience store and a mini-warehouse development located to the north, across Cantrell Road. There are three (3) single family residences located to the northeast, across Cantrell Road. The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial. The requested C-3 zoning does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Staff is supportive of the rezoning to C-3. Staff feels that the proposed rezoning to eliminate the conditions which were placed on the property in 1988 is reasonable. On October 17, 1989, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 15,765 which established the Highway 10 Design Overlay District (DOD). The Highway 10 DOD provides property development criteria which are much more stringent than the typical ordinance requirements for C-3 developments. Staff feels that if the property is developed in conformance with the Highway 10 DOD standards, no site plan review by the Planning Commission will be necessary. If all of the Highway 10 DOD standards cannot be met, the property will have to be rezoned to a Planned Zoning Development, which includes site plan review by the Planning Commission. Staff feels that the requested C-3 zoning will be compatible with the general area, and will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested C-3 zoning. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-5258-C NAME: Parkway Mazda Expansion Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: 12206 West Markham Street DEVELOPER: Crain Investment LP 6706 South University Avenue Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.6 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: OS ALLOWED USES: Open Space PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Automobile dealership expansion area VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 2 BACKGROUND: In 1994, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 16,762 which rezoned a portion of the property from C-2 to C-3. In January of 1993 a Short- form PD-C was approved for a one-story retail building containing approximately 7,553 square feet. The PCD approved tenant for the site is ABRA Auto Body and Glass Shop. Access to Lot 1 is from West Markham via a 25-foot drive through Lot 2. Ordinance No. 17,468 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on May 6, 1997, established THJR Addition Lot #2 Short-form PCD, creating a two lot plat and a rezoning to allow an automobile sales lot. Lot 2 has developed with a 13,200 square foot building with 209 parking spaces. The building consists of 9,000 square feet on the first floor for sales and service with an additional 3,600 square feet on the second floor for parts and general office. As a conditional of approval the applicant agreed to no outdoor paging, the hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm, all vehicles were to be unloaded on site, the lighting was to be directional on 25-foot poles and no automobile body work was to be performed on Lot 2. The applicant now proposes to expand the automobile business into an adjacent 1.74 acre tract recently acquired from the City. The Department of the Army Little Rock District Corps of Engineers has reviewed the site (File No. 16,351) and determined “…no wetland areas or other waters of the United States exist within the 1.8 acre project area. Therefore, the placement of fill material at the subject location does not require a Section 404 Department of the Army permit. However, please be advised that the northeastern limit of the project area is in close proximity to Rock Creek. Any discharge of dredged or fill material within Rock Creek would require Department of the Army permit.” Resolution No. 11,526 of the City of Little Rock Board of Directors dated June 3, 2003, authorized the purchase of this 1.74 acre tract of land from the City of Little Rock by the applicant. The transfer of the property has taken place. The Parkway Mazda site has been the subject of numerous code enforcement actions over the past several years. All of the enforcement actions stem from the site being overcrowded with vehicles. Numerous notices have been issued for vehicles being parked in the public right-of-way, vehicles being parked in required landscape areas, transportation trucks being unloaded in the public right-of-way and inventory being parked on nearby properties such as Home Depot, Luby’s and Chenal Golf driving range. Past enforcement action has included issues of many notices as well as the issuance of court citations. Notices were also issuance to Home Depot and Luby’s for allowing Parkway Mazda to park inventory on their sites. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 3 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant has recently completed the purchase of the site from the City and now wishes to expand the existing Parkway Mazda automobile dealership. The expansion will be constructed in two phases. The first phase will consist of a 7,200 square foot service facility and approximately 80 parking spaces. The second phase will be strictly a parking expansion consisting of 85 spaces. The spaces will be used for inventory as well as parking for cars waiting to be serviced. The developer has received a wetlands determination from the Corp of Engineers. No portion of the property contains wetlands or “Waters of the US”. The property is below the 100-year flood plain, but not within the floodway. The applicant has indicated fill material will bring the site above the 100-year flood plain and also make the site accessible from the existing facility. The applicant is proposing to gain a 3:1 slope by utilizing City owned property for the slope. The applicant has indicated plantings will be reestablished and a landscape plan will be submitted and approved by Parks and Recreation prior to development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site abuts Rock Creek to the east, north and northwest and the Parkway Mazda to the south. An automobile body repair shop is located adjacent to the site sharing a drive with Parkway Mazda and a home improvement store is located further west of the site. Across West Markham Street there is a second automobile dealership and a retail center containing a mix of retail and office uses. Other uses in the area include a quick shop with gas pumps located on the corner of West Markham and Chenal Parkway and a tire and battery center located on the adjacent corner. Rock Creek Square is located to the southeast of the site on the corner of Bowman and West Markham and Entergy has a storage yard to the south of the site on I-2 zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association, the Parkway Place Property Owners 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 4 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to any land clearing or grading. 2. Show the location of the floodway boundary on the plan. In accordance with Section 31-176, floodway areas must be shown as floodway easements or be dedicated to the public. In addition, a 25-foot wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway boundary. 3. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e). 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: An existing 30-inch sewer main is located in area. No construction within existing sewer main easement. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The 50-foot-wide right-of- way for the raw water line is owned by Central Arkansas Water (Deed recorded Book 242, Page 404 on July 23, 1936 and transferred to Central Arkansas Water in document 2001051904 recorded July 3, 2001) and an easement from Central Arkansas Water will be required in order to allow for access and paving of this exception. A 16-foot-wide utility easement will be required (in line with the water line easement platted as part of Lot 1, THJR Addition) to accommodate the existing 12-inch water line (installed outside easement recorded Book 1415 Page 323, recorded November 15, 1976, and obtained in conjunction with Improvement District 325.) Water service and fire protection to this tract will be provided through a separate connection off the 12-inch main, unless this area is platted as part of Lot 2, THJR Addition. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 5 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 Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a new auto service center. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: The proposed widths of the land use buffers along the northern and eastern perimeters of the site are less than the average 27 feet required by the zoning ordinance. Additionally, their widths are less than the nine (9) feet minimum allowed at any given point. The perimeter strips meet with landscape ordinance requirements with the transfers allowed. Interior landscaping islands must be more evenly distributed throughout the parking areas to help break up the sea of asphalt. To receive credit as interior landscaping, interior islands must be at least 7 ½ feet in width and be at least 300 square feet in area. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be 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. 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 and eastern perimeters of the site. This requirement may be deemed unnecessary because of the expanse of the adjacent floodplain. 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 listed an action statement that recommends the aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to influence more neighborhood- friendly and better quality development. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 6 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request was located in an area previously owned by the City. Staff stated the applicant and the City had come to terms for the sale of the property and the sale had been finalized. Staff noted the applicant did have a determination letter from the Corp of Engineers indicating the site was not located in the floodway. Staff stated the request was to phase the development with the building construction in Phase I and additional parking in Phase II. Staff requested the applicant provide the location of any proposed dumpsters along with the required screening. Staff also requested additional information concerning the days and hours of operation, site lighting and any outdoor paging. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff requested the floodway boundary be indicated on the site plan. Staff also indicated a 25-foot wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway boundary. Landscape comments were addressed. Staff requested the applicant more evenly distribute the interior landscaping islands. Staff stated the proposed widths of the land use buffer along the northern and eastern perimeters of the site were less than the average 27-foot required by the zoning ordinance. Staff noted the Commission may deem the buffer unnecessary since the area abutted the creek and was densely treed. Staff stated the proposed width did meet with the landscape ordinance requirement. 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 November 6, 2003, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated no dumpsters will be located on the site and the days and hours of operation will remain as previously approved. The applicant has also indicated no outdoor paging will result from the addition of the service/detail building. A note on the site plan indicates all site lighting will be low level and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned properties. The applicant has also provided a sketch indicating the property line and the adjacent floodway. The applicant will be clearing on City owned property to allow the top of the slope to be at a 3:1 ratio and fill the proposed site to the level of the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 7 existing site. The applicant has indicated the slope will be replanted as required by the Parks Department and the applicant will maintain the area until the Parks Department and the applicant agree the slope is stabilized. The applicant has indicated construction of a two phase development. The first phase will consist of approximately 80 parking spaces. The second phase will be a parking expansion consisting of 85 spaces and the construction of a 7,200 square foot service facility. The spaces will be used for inventory as well as parking for cars waiting to be serviced. The applicant has indicated the building will not be constructed with the first parking area. The applicant has indicated the building pad will also be parking in the initial stages. Staff recommends the applicant construct the second phase of the parking when the building is constructed. The site has historically been too small to meet the demand of the dealership’s inventory and staff feels to add an additional use that would also generate a parking demand would not be prudent. The applicant has not increased the landscaping strip along the eastern perimeter of the site. Staff would recommend the applicant increase the landscaping strip to the nine feet with an average of twenty-seven feet the minimums typically required per the zoning ordinance. The site abuts a open space zoned tract, the City of Little Rock owned property, but is scheduled to be the Rock Creek Trail. Staff feels it important to buffer the site from the adjoining properties to further enhance the future trail site. 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 the applicant construct the second phase of the parking when the proposed building is constructed. Staff recommends the landscaping strip along the eastern perimeter be increased to the minimum nine foot and average twenty-seven feet as is typically required by the zoning ordinance. Staff recommends the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department of the City of Little Rock establish an agreement for the maintenance of the slope area prior to a grading permit being issued. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5258-C 8 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered 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 that the applicant construct the second phase of the parking when the proposed building was constructed. Staff presented a recommendation the landscaping strip along the eastern perimeter be increased to the minimum nine feet and average twenty-seven feet as typically required by the zoning ordinance. Staff presented a recommendation the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department of the City of Little Rock establish an agreement for the maintenance of the slope area prior to a grading permit being issued and the applicant provide easements for floodway maintenance to the city prior to the issue being considered by the Board of Directors. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-6237-A NAME: LaVergne Revised Short-form POD LOCATION: 14104 Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Rene LaVergne 14104 Taylor Loop Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Development Consultants Inc. 2200 North Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 0.50 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-O ALLOWED USES: Veterinary clinic PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-O PROPOSED USE: Veterinary clinic VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 17,404 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 18, 1997 established La Vergne Veterinary Clinic Short-form PD-O located at 14104 Taylor Loop Road. The applicant proposed to utilize an existing 1,314 square foot single story December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6237-A 2 frame house as a veterinary clinic. An existing 520 square foot block garage would be used as an indoor boarding facility for 22 dogs. The applicant proposed to remodel both structures and identified an area for future expansion. There were to be no animals outdoors without a caregiver and no outdoor runs or kennels. The applicant indicated with the proposed future expansion area there would be an addition of twenty animals on site (42 total). All structures were to be fully enclosed to minimize any noise from animals. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved planned development to allow a two-story addition opposed to the single story addition previously approved. The proposed second floor area would be utilized as additional storage space and provide additional space for boarding area for felines. The applicant has indicated all other previous conditions will continue to apply to the site. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a veterinary clinic with a two car parking pad located in the front with additional parking in the rear. To the south of the site is a vacant lot and a structure currently being used as a residential unit and a single-chair beauty salon. The area to the west of the site is a retail development containing an antique/home furnishing store and restaurant. The area to the east of the site remains as single-family homes and one office development has located southeast of the site. Taylor Loop Road is an unimproved roadway, which is scheduled to be improved as a part of the recently approved bond issue. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association, the Charleston Heights/North Rahling Road 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6237-A 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. All previous comments on the proposal apply to this minor revision (building expansion). 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this expansion. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: All driveways shall be at least 20-feet in width. Place fire hydrant 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 Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision of a Planned Office Development for a proposed expansion. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6237-A 4 Landscape: The width of the proposed landscape strip along the southern perimeter is slightly less than the six (6) nine (9) inch minimum allowed by the landscape ordinance and the nine (9) feet minimum allowed by the zoning ordinance. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan does not list goals, objectives, or action statements relevant to this case. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Rene La Vergne was present representing the request. Staff stated the site was previously approved as a PD-O to allow an existing structure to be converted to a veterinary clinic. Staff stated the previous approval allowed for a single-story addition and the applicant was now requesting a two story addition. Staff requested the applicant provide an elevation of the proposed addition. Staff stated the primary concerns were aesthetic and the fit to the neighborhood. Staff also requested any modifications to the approved days and hours of operation or conditions of the previous approval. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted all previous conditions would apply to the site. Staff also noted storm water detention would apply to the expansion area. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the previous approval was under the old ordinance and the indicated buffers did not meet with the current ordinance requirement. Staff noted the proposed buffer was three inches shy of the minimum six foot nine inch buffer required by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff stated they did not feel with the three inch deficiency the applicant would be required to make application to the City Beautiful Commission. Staff noted the required land use buffer would be nine feet. Staff stated the Commission could reduce this area to the six feet five inches if they deemed the existing buffer appropriate. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated there will be no change to the days and hours of operation and there will not be any outdoor runs or kennels located on the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6237-A 5 The applicant is requesting a reduction in the required land use buffer. The site was redeveloped under the “old” ordinance, which required a minimum of six foot landscape strip. Adjacent to the existing structure there is a six feet five inch landscape strip. The proposed addition was previously approved with the reduced strip. The only difference is that the structure will now be a two story structure. The applicant owns the adjoining vacant lot but does not have immediate plans for development. The adjoining property is zoned R-2, Single- family and is shown on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as Transitional. This would allow the site to develop as a non-residential use through the planned development process if not developed as single-family. Staff feels the reduced strip will not have any adverse impact on the adjoining property. The applicant has indicated the parking lot expansion will maintain the minimum six feet nine inch landscape strip. The applicant has indicated the second story addition will be constructed with a pitched roof maintaining the existing pitch. The building materials will be similar to the existing structure. The applicant has indicated upon completion siding will be placed on the entire structure. The second story addition will also have windows and openings to allow natural light into the area. Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The applicant has indicated the new construction will be architecturally compatible with the existing structure and the building materials will be similar in composition to the existing building. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the proposed addition should have minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the landscape/buffer strip along the southern perimeter to be reduced to 6.5 feet. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6237-A 6 Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow the landscape/buffer strip along the southern perimeter to be reduced to 6.5 feet. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-6323-I NAME: The Village at Rahling Road Revised Long-form PCD LOCATION: On Rahling Circle, Unrecorded Lot 8A DEVELOPER: Briarwood Animal Hospital Enterprises, Inc. 8422 Kanis Road Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Rickett Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 241326 Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 0.6660 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: C-2 Permitted uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Veterinary clinic VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 5, 1997, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,542 which established The Village at Rahling Road Long-form PCD. The PCD established a 14-lot development with C-2 uses being permitted. The initial action approved a site plan for Lots 1 and 2 of the development with the intent being that each of the remaining lots December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-I 2 would be brought to the Commission on an individual basis as a particular development was proposed. Subsequent actions have been approved to allow seven small buildings on the properties within the development. There are currently four buildings of the seven approved buildings completed or under construction on the rear lots. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the development of Chenal Valley Animal Hospital, a full service animal hospital to locate on Unrecorded Lot 8A of the Village at Rahling Road Subdivision. The proposed building will meet the architectural control guidelines as required by the Chenal Valley Architectural Control Committee. The proposed structure will be constructed of commercial grade steel and wood framing. The exterior of the building will be a southern Louisiana plantation style and will be in keeping with other commercial structures in the development. The principal building roof will be a pitched gable roof with 8:12 slope. Roofing will be architectural composition shingles. Windows will be wood with divided lites. Exterior walls will be stucco and brick. The exterior will also feature a wrap- around porch with architectural columns and a porte-cochere at the main entry for vehicle passenger access. The site will be landscaped per Chenal Valley Architectural Control requirements and will include a fenced yard area. Signage will meet the guidelines as required by the Architectural Control Committee. The parking areas will be of asphalt paving per city specifications and the concrete walks will have brick borders as required by the development regulations. Parking lot lighting shall be antique style fixtures. The applicant is not proposing the placement of any outdoor runs or kennels as a part of the development. A fenced area is shown on the site plan to allow the patients an area to go outdoors only with a caregiver. The applicant is proposing boarding as a part of the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a cleared flat site with street improvements in place. The property was cleared and graded with initial development of the PCD. Access to the lot is via Rahling Circle, off of Rahling Road. The O-2 and PCD zoned properties immediately south and east of the site are undeveloped. Smaller office buildings are located adjacent to the proposed site to the south and southeast. The larger buildings of the multiuse PCD are located north of the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-I 3 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 and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Provide handicap ramps for sidewalks. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: A 10-foot utility easement is required along the eastern perimeter of the site. 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. Water service is available. Developer must extend water service to back of sidewalk. 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 Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Community Shopping for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial Development for a Veterinary clinic. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-I 4 The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. 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. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Mark Rickett was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request was to place a building on a unplatted lot located at the Village at Rahling Road development. Staff noted a final plat would be filed prior to a building permit being issued. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation, the location of any proposed dumpsters and the maximum allowed sign height and area. Staff also requested the applicant provide information concerning boarding, outdoor runs and/or kennels proposed for the site. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted all driveways shall be concrete aprons and the applicant would be required to replace any broken curb or sidewalks in the right-of-way prior to occupancy. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the areas set aside for landscaping appeared to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 7:00 am to noon on Saturday. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height to be 29.0 feet with an average building height of 19.0 feet. The applicant has indicated a ground mounted monument style sign 18-inches high and 36-feet in length on a six foot base. The proposed signage is consistent with signage allowed in office zones. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-I 5 The applicant has indicated boarding will take place on the site but there will be no outdoor runs or kennels. The applicant has stated animals will be taken outside only with a handler. The applicant has indicated there will be one doctor and three employees on site. The applicant has also indicated the veterinarian will not treat large animals on site. The typical minimum parking demand for a facility of this type would be six spaces. The applicant has indicated 18 on-site parking spaces more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The applicant has located the dumpster in the rear of the building. The site plan indicates the dumpster will be screened on three sides at least two feet above the top of the container. Staff is supportive of the placement and the provided screening. The applicant has indicated landscaping and buffers as well as interior landscaping within the parking lots. The areas set aside for buffers and landscaping appear to meet with ordinance requirements. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping plan. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The proposed use of the site, a veterinarian clinic should have no adverse impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered 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. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-6828-B NAME: Hilton Garden Inn – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: NE corner Peachtree and Centerview Drives OWNER/APPLICANT: Sidney Saleson/Frank Riggins; The Mehlburger Firm PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of a hotel on this O-2 zoned, 5.0± acre tract. 1. SITE LOCATION: The property is located at the northeast corner of Peachtree and Centerview Drives in the Westlake Office Park. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: This 5± acre tract is located on the southern edge of the large, Westlake Office Park development. The properties to the north, east and northwest are zoned O-1 and O-3 and are occupied by a number of large office buildings. One small parcel of undeveloped, O-3 zoned property and the I-430 right-of-way are located across Peachtree Drive, to the south. The Sandpiper Subdivision is located to the west. The Subdivision’s pool and clubhouse are located across Centerview Drive from the proposed hotel site. There are elements of this proposal that make it more compatible with the neighborhood than the approved 2000 hotel plan. The hotel has been reduced from 4 stories to 3; the number of rooms has been reduced from 167 to 120; and access to the site has been limited to Centerview Drive. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Sandpiper and John Barrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The hotel will contain 120 rooms requiring 132 on-site parking spaces; 1 per room plus an additional 10%. The site plan proposes a single point of access off of Centerview Drive and 148 parking spaces. With some slight modification of the driveway entrance, the proposed driveway and parking comply with ordinance standards. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6828-B 2 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. The only exception to this, is the need to provide at least one interior landscaping island within the middle of the row of proposed 39 space parking areas. The removal of one parking space to satisfy this need should suffice. 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 the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 3. Reduce the drive throat width to 36’ adjacent to the right-of-way. The drive can then flare out to an island further into the property if desired. 4. A grading permit is accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 6. As needed, provide an easement and details for spillway drainage from the lake. 7. Provide critical cross section for the proposed terraces to demonstrate compliance with the land alteration ordinance. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available, Capacity Contribution Analysis required. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details. Entergy: Ten (10) foot easement required from pole to wherever 30 pad MTD transformer is finally located. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6828-B 3 CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted. Southwestern Bell: No Comments received. 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. 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. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be size to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place a fire hydrant per code. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: No Comments received. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 6, 2003) Frank Riggins, of the Mehlburger Firm, was present representing the application. Staff introduced the item and noted more information was needed on the proposed “small restaurant” and meeting room facilities. Staff asked for a signage plan and requested details on the retaining walls, site lighting, fencing and the dumpster location. Staff requested that any proposed drop-off canopy and swimming pool area be indicated on the plan. Staff noted that large areas at the northwest and southwest corners of the site could be left undisturbed and asked the applicant to specify plans for those areas. Public Works, Landscape and Utility Comments were presented. The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by November 12, 2003. The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6828-B 4 STAFF ANALYSIS: On April 13, 2000, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow for construction of a 4-story, 167 room Hilton Hotel on this undeveloped, 5± acre, O-2 zoned acre tract. In addition to the 167 guest rooms, the proposal included a small eating area and a small lounge, both designed primarily for use by hotel guests. Access to the site was from driveways onto Peachtree Drive and Centerview Drive. The plan was approved with 178 parking spaces, 5 less than the 183 required for a hotel of that size. There was discussion between the applicant and the Sandpiper Neighborhood which resulted in some agreements outside of the Planning Commission action. Due to a misunderstanding, the applicant was not aware that the conditional use permit expired on April 13, 2003. On October 16, 2003, the question of extending the Hilton Inn C.U.P. was placed before the Commission in an agenda meeting. The Commission determined that the C.U.P. had expired and a new application must be filed. The applicant has now filed a new conditional use permit application to allow for construction of a Hilton Garden Inn on this O-2 zoned site. The hotel will be 3 stories in height and will contain 120 rooms, a small restaurant mainly for guests and small meeting room facilities. The hotel restaurant is a buffet style serving line, seating approximately 50 persons and staffed by the hotel. There will be two 1,500 square foot meeting rooms designed to seat up to 100 persons each. The meeting rooms are designed to be divided in half, providing 4 smaller meeting rooms, if needed. Access to the site is via a single driveway off of Centerview Drive. Signage is proposed to consist of a single wall sign on the front (Peachtree) façade a single wall sign on the side (Centerview) façade and a single ground-mounted, monument style sign near the entrance driveway on Centerview Drive. The wall signs will read “Hilton Garden Inn.” The ground- mounted sign will be 6’6” tall and 13 feet long. The 6’6” height and 84.5 square foot area of the ground sign are slightly larger than the 6 foot height and 72 square feet permitted in office zones. Staff is supportive of a variance to allow the sign as proposed due to the larger size of the site. The dumpster will be located in the loading dock area, on the back side of the hotel. No fencing is proposed and there will be no exterior pool area. No bar or lounge has been proposed. A significant amount of natural area will be retained at the northwest and southwest corners of the site. Cutting and filling of the site will be required, with the cut being in the rear or north area of the property and filling be retained by walls on the south side of the building. Two segmental block retaining walls will be constructed ranging in the height from grade to 13± feet at the northeast corner of the site. Public Works has reviewed the preliminary plans for the retaining walls and the cut and has determined that no variances are required. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6828-B 5 Staff is supportive of the requested C.U.P. The proposal has been reduced in scale and intensity from the 2000 plan. The proposed use should be compatible with uses and zoning in the area. On November 12, 2003, the applicant submitted responses to issued raised at Subdivision Committee and noted in the analysis above. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the staff comments outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the staff report. 2. Signage is to be limited to a single wall sign on the front (Peachtree) façade reading “Hilton Garden Inn”, a single wall sign on the side (Centerview) façade reading “Hilton Garden Inn” and a monument style ground-mounted sign to be located adjacent to the Centerview Drive entrance not to exceed 6’6” in height and 84.5 square feet in area. 3. There is to be no separate bar or lounge within the hotel. 4. Areas of undisturbed natural area located at the southwest and northwest corners, near Centerview Drive, are to be clearly labeled on the site plan and protected during construction. 5. Site lighting is to be shielded and directed downward and inward to the site. Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow the single, monument style ground-mounted sign not to exceed 6’6” in height and 84.5 square feet in area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-7434-A NAME: Bowman Office Showroom Warehouse Short-form PCD LOCATION: on the west side of South Bowman Road approximately 800 feet south of the Kanis Road intersection DEVELOPER: Dickson Flake Partners P.O. Box 3546 Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.04 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Office/showroom/warehouse VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: An application was filed for the July 24, 2003, Planning Commission agenda to rezone the site from R-2 to PCD to allow the construction of a two bay automatic carwash on December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7434-A 2 the site and the placement of an island containing two vacuum stations. The applicant, prior to the public hearing, withdrew the request. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 17,325 square foot office/showroom/warehouse building on the site. The applicant has indicated potential users of the site would be users that would typically need a small office space in the front with warehouse space in the rear. The rear portion of the building would have overhead doors for loading and unloading. The doors are not proposed as dock doors. The applicant is proposing the placement of 63 parking spaces and two dumpsters on the site. The hours of operation are proposed as Monday through Saturday from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a vacant single-family structure located in the mid-section of the site. There are single-family homes located to the north and south of this site very close to the property lines. The ice skating arena is located to the east of the site and a commercial development with multiple uses is located to the north of the adjoining single-family home. To the southeast of the site is a large office/warehouse development adjoining vacant O-3 zoned property. The proposed development site is very deep, abutting the Cherry Creek Subdivision to the west. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association 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 were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Bowman Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. Set new concrete apron back to the future edge of pavement. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7434-A 3 3. Plans of all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to the start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of- way from Traffic Engineering (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted an approved prior to the start of construction. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan and the proposed discharge location. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main located in the area. No construction within existing sewer main easement. 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 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. 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 the 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7434-A 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Service Trades District for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for office, showroom, and warehousing uses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use 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 to the north, south and west where adjacent to residential properties. An irrigations 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. 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. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request was to locate an office/showroom/warehouse facility on the site. Staff requested Mr. White provide additional information concerning days and hours of operation, relocation of the eastern dumpster away from the street, hours of service for the dumpsters and if deliveries would be taken behind the building. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed right-of-way indicated was sufficient to meet the required dedication for a minor arterial. Staff also indicated a grading permit would be required prior to the start of work. Staff stated storm water detention would be required on the site and requested the applicant provide the location of the storm water detention facility. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed 50-foot buffer along the west would need to provide year around screening. Staff noted no fence would be needed and the buffer could be supplemented with trees and shrubs if necessary. Staff also noted screening would be required along the north and south property lines. Mr. White stated screening in these areas would be provided. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7434-A 5 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the dedication of right-of-way as requested by Public Works and indicated street improvements will be constructed along the entire property frontage. The applicant has also removed the eastern dumpster resulting in the removal of the dumpster nearest the street. The applicant has indicated the dumpster will be serviced during normal business hours. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm six days per week. The applicant has also indicated the proposed location of signage. The applicant has indicated signage will be a ground mounted monument style sign with a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the proposed days and hours of operation and the proposed signage and placement. The applicant has indicated the building to be 17,325 square feet and the site to contain 63 parking spaces. The typical minimum parking demand for an office/showroom/warehouse activity would be thirteen parking spaces. The proposed parking is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The applicant has indicated the minimum nine foot wide landscape strip along the north and south property lines along with a note concerning the proposed screening. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided through dense evergreen plantings or a six foot wood fence with its face side directed outward. The applicant has also indicated a fifty foot undisturbed buffer along the rear of the property. The applicant has also noted should the fifty foot buffer not provide the year around screening, additional plantings will be provided. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping and buffering. The proposed development should have minimal to no adverse impact on adjoining properties. The site is shown as Service Trades District on the City’s Future Land Use Plan, which allows activities similar to the proposed development. The applicant is requesting a PCD, as required by the land use classification, to develop the site as an office/showroom/warehouse. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7434-A 6 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: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff stated the John Barrow Neighborhood Association had indicated support of the proposed rezoning request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the staff report. 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. David Meroney was present in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located on Cherry Laurel Drive and from his back yard he could see the proposed site. He stated his concerns with allowing the area to develop with non- residential uses. Mr. Meroney stated there were sites in the area currently zoned for non-residential uses and questioned why the applicant did not locate on one of the zoned site. Mr. Joe White addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the development was leaving a 50-foot undisturbed buffer to the west of the development and the applicant had agreed to install additional plantings if the buffer did not provide year around screening. Mr. White stated the request was for an office/showroom/warehouse development, which was consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. Commissioner Rector noted the request was consistent with the City’s adopted Future Land Use Plan. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: Z-7529 NAME: Sol Alman Short-form PID and Right-of-way Abandonment for a portion of Hanger Street from East 8th Street to East 9th Street LOCATION: 1300 East 9th Street DEVELOPER: Sol Alman Company 1300 East 9th Street Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick 319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 2.06 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: I-3 ALLOWED USES: Heavy Industrial PROPOSED ZONING: PD-I PROPOSED USE: Recycling facility VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site contains 2.06 acres and the owner is requesting to rezone the site to PD-I to allow the construction of a 45,900 square foot building. The applicant has indicated 20 parking spaces on the proposed site plan. The maximum building height for the structure is 35-feet. The applicant has indicated there will December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7529 2 be no doors, windows or openings on the north, south and west sides of the building. The applicant is also proposing the closure of Hanger Street from East 8th Street to East 9th Street. The applicant has indicated the easement rights will be maintained. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is home to a large recycling facility covering several blocks. Immediately south of the site across East 9th Street there are four occupied single-family homes. Also across East 9th Street to the southeast there are two day care centers and the remainder of the area also contains non-residential uses some of which heavy industrial type uses. To the north of the site is an elevator service company and to the east of the site are heavy industrial uses. West of the site are single-family homes on the north side of East 9th Street and commercial uses on the south side of East 9th Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed development. The Hanger Hill 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 land use would classify College Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way 30-feet from centerline. 2. A 20-feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of College and 9th Street. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to the property. 5. Public Works would support the closure of the Hanger/Miller Street right-of- way. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main located on the site. No construction within the existing sewer main easement. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7529 3 Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Hanger Street will need to be retained as a utility easement to accommodate existing 20-inch and 2-inch water mains. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter 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 the 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 hydrant 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 I-30 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use Urban for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Industrial Development for an enclosed operation for recycled materials. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. 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. However, the property in question is located in the area covered by the East of I-30 Study of 2003. The study recommended the current land uses shown in the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7529 4 area to protect and enhance the integrity of the area surrounding the Presidential Park and Heifer International Center. The study recognizes that heavy industrial uses are located in the area but also promotes investment in non-industrial uses. This property abuts College Avenue that is a north-south collector that could be used as a southern entrance to the Presidential Library via I-630. This use could serve as a buffer between the unenclosed uses to the east from the residential uses to the west. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating the business was existing and the owner was requesting to construct a materials storage facility on the site. Staff noted there was a grade change between the building and East 9th Street. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the activity that would be taking place inside the building. Staff also stated the fencing that was in place was placed at the request of adjoining neighbors. Staff requested the applicant provide the required documentation to close the right-of-way for Hanger Street. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant should dedicate right-of-way for College Street to meet the Master Street Plan requirement. Staff also requested a 20-foot radial dedication at the intersection of College and East 9th Street. Staff noted the storm water detention ordinance requirements would apply to the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the areas set aside for buffers appeared to meet with ordinance requirements. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way as requested by staff and a 20-foot radial dedication at the intersection of West 9th and College Street. The applicant is requesting to franchise the existing hedge and fence, which will become a part of the right-of-way when dedicated along College Street. Staff is supportive of this request. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7529 5 The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Saturday. The applicant has also indicated any additional site lighting will be low level and directional, directed away from residentially zoned property. The building is proposed to be a maximum of 35- feet in height and contain 45,900 square feet. The building will be closed on three sides with no doors, windows or openings on these three sides. The front of the building (the east side) will remain open for full access. The applicant has indicated the site will be concrete and asphalt. The proposed site plan includes the development of twenty on-site parking spaces. Based on the proposed use of the facility, the proposed parking should be adequate to serve the development. The applicant is requesting to close Hanger Street as a part of the proposed request. The applicant owns property on both sides of the existing Hanger Street right-of-way with the road currently a part of the applicant’s overall development. Staff is supportive of the proposed request to close the street. The applicant has provided documentation from the utility companies indicating their desire to maintain easement rights. The applicant has indicated the new building will be used for bailing and storage of non-ferrous materials. The proposed building is screened on three sides and should have minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining properties. The building will screen the residential properties to the south and west and the adjoining non-residential use to the south. The only opening in the building will be located within the applicant’s property. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The construction as proposed should have minimal to no adverse impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request including the abandonment of the Hanger Street right-of-way, subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the request to franchise the existing fence and shrubs in the right-of-way. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7529 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request including the abandonment of the Hanger Street right-of-way, subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation that the applicant place directional signage along the western building façade at the intersection with East 8th Street to direct truck traffic to utilize the East 9th Street entrance. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the request to franchise the existing fence and shrubs in the right-of-way. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 22 FILE NO.: Z-7530 NAME: Fox Ridge at Chenal Short-form PD-R LOCATION: on the northwest corner of Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Saline Investment Group 9625 Rowlett Drive North Little Rock, AR 72113 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 7.4 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: MF-12 ALLOWED USES: Multi-family 12 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Assisted Living Facility VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow reduced driveway spacing on Chenal Valley Drive. 2. A variance to allow an increased height of cut and fill slope. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7530 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to develop a two-story elderly housing assisted living facility on this 9.41 acres. The units will each contain a single bedroom and bath. There is a common dining room, commercial kitchen, commercial laundry facility, a media room with theater style seating, library and arts and crafts center. The facility will also contain a small laundry facility for residents or their families to wash their delicate clothing. The facility will contain 130 rooms. The applicant has indicated 91 parking spaces on the site plan. The applicant has indicated there will be no more than 18 employees working at any given time. The applicant has stated residents of the facility do not drive; a private bus will pick up the residents several times during the day in order to provide access to shopping and services. The applicant is requesting a variance for driveway spacing on Chenal Valley Drive. The circular drive will serve the resident’s bus and visitor parking. The circular driveway will be one way and should function as one curb cut. The driveway on the west end of the Chenal Valley Drive frontage will serve mainly the employees and service entrance. The applicant has indicated this will limit the number of trips from the driveway as most employees will only come and go at the beginning and end of their shift. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow an increased wall height along the northwest corner of the site. The area will be buffered to the north by an undisturbed buffer area. The applicant has indicated the increased wall height is necessary to allow the ground level units access to light and air. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a wooded site currently zoned MF-12. There is a vacant OS zoned tract located to the north of the site which slopes downward to the north. There is a vacant C-2 zoned tract located on the northeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Chenal Valley Drive and a large church is located on the southeast corner of the intersection. Immediately south of the site is a vacant R-2 zoned tract. At the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Chenal Valley Drive the median ends and the parkway becomes a two lane roadway to the north. Future plans included the development of the divided parkway to continue to Cantrell Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The DuQuesnne Property Owners Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7530 3 Association and the Bayonne Property Owners 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. A 20-feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Chenal Parkway with Chenal Valley Drive. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 4. The proposed retaining walls and terraces do not meet the requirements of the land alteration ordinance. Maximum height of terracing is 30-feet. For architectural stone, two terraces at a 15-foot rise each can be used. 5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Hauling of fill material on or off site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. For a collector street, driveways must be 125-feet from the property boundary, 250-feet back from the right-of- way line of Chenal Parkway and 250-feet center to center. The width of the driveway must not exceed 36-feet. 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 the Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details at 688-1414. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7530 4 Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Please submit two copies of the plans for the private fire line to Central Arkansas Water for review. Contact Central Arkansas Water 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. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 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 Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Multifamily for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development - Residential for an assisted living facility at 16 dwelling units per acre. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: A small portion of the width of the proposed street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive is less than the eleven (11) feet minimum allowed by the zoning ordinance. The full width requirement in this area, without transfers, is twenty-two (22) feet. 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 the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7530 5 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the applicant. Staff noted the site was currently zoned MF-12 and the request was to rezone the site to PD-R to allow the construction of an assisted living facility. Staff questioned the number of units proposed for the development. Mr. White stated there would be 130 rooms available. Staff also questioned the number of proposed parking spaces. Mr. White stated typically the residents did not drive. The facility would provide transportation for the residents. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the proposed cut along the northern perimeter did not meet the ordinance requirements. Staff suggested the applicant redesign the site to accommodate the hillside. Staff also requested information concerning the number of driveway cuts along Chenal Valley Drive. Mr. White stated the transit for the residents would be the primary users of the circular drive. He stated the drive would be marked as one-way to reduce the number of conflicts. Staff stated they would consider allowing the drive but suggested Mr. White consider an alternative circulation pattern on the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the street buffer fell below the minimum allowed buffer. Staff also stated irrigation would be required to water landscaped areas. 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 November 17, 2003. The revised plan addressed some of the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the proposed development includes 130 units of assisted living housing and 91 parking spaces. The proposed parking does not meet the typical minimum parking demand for a multi-family development. The typical parking demand for an elderly housing multi-family development would be 65 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated a large majority of the residents do not drive. Staff feels the proposed parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The site plan also includes a one-way circular driveway on the site to allow residents to be picked-up and dropped-off at the door. The driveway does not meet the access and circulation requirements of the ordinances with the placement of four drives along Chenal Valley Drive but staff feels the placement is acceptable. The location of the eastern-most drive is located approximately 340-feet from the property line as required in Sections 30-43 and 31-210 of the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7530 6 City of Little Rock Code of Ordinances. The drive located on the western property line is located approximately 135 feet (the minimum spacing required for a drive on a collector street from the property line is 150 feet). The circular drive should have a minimum spacing of 250 feet. The proposed driveway is approximately 145 feet center to center. Staff is supportive of the requested variances to allow reduced driveway spacing. The circular drive will be signed as one way reducing the number of conflicting traffic movements. The drive located on the western end to the site should not have any adverse impact if adjoining properties are developed since the drive is within 15-feet of the required spacing. The applicant is requesting an increased wall height along the northwestern portion of the site. The ordinance allows a maximum of thirty vertical feet of fill or excavation in three ten foot vertical terraces, or two fifteen-foot vertical terraces. The applicant is requesting four ten foot vertical terraces in this area. The applicant has indicated the additional cut and fill is required to allow the lower units access to light and air and to limit the area of clearing located north of the site. Staff is supportive of this request. The area will abut an undisturbed area of approximately sixty feet at the most narrow point and the area to the north of the site is zoned OS. The applicant has indicated the street buffer is less than the ordinance requirement. The typical required street buffer would be eleven feet. The proposed development includes a 15-foot utility and drainage easement as well as a 25-foot building setback. Staff feels the proposed street buffer is adequate. The street buffer is approximately 10-feet without the easement and 25-feet with the easement. Typically easements are not allowed to count toward fulfilling the required landscaping. The applicant has indicated landscaping in front of the building and perimeter landscaping. In addition, the applicant has indicated a 100-foot undisturbed buffer along Chenal Parkway. Staff is supportive of the requested landscaping strip along Chenal Valley Drive. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The proposed request to rezone the site to PD-R to allow the construction of an assisted living facility on the site should have minimal to no adverse impact on the 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 variance to allow reduced driveway spacing for the two western drives. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow an increased wall height along the northwestern portion of the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7530 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered 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 presented a recommendation of approval of the variance to allow reduced driveway spacing for the two western drives and the variance to allow an increased wall height along the northwestern portion of the site. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 23 FILE NO.: LU03-08-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City Planning District Location: 2512 Center Street Request: Single Family to Mixed Use Source: Nat L. Conway 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 rebuild a café. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include an area on both sides of Center Street between the applicant‘s property and the intersection of Roosevelt Road. This expansion would increase the area shown as Mixed Use located at Roosevelt Road and Louisiana Street. Staff has not expanded this application toward the west since Spring Street does not connect to Roosevelt Road. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is the site of a café destroyed by fire and is currently zoned R-4 Two Family and is 0.16 acres ± in size. All of the property in the expanded area consists of houses and vacant lots zoned R-4 Two Family. The houses and business north of Roosevelt Road lie in the Capital Zoning District and are zoned N - Neighborhood Residential and Commercial, which allows single family, two- family, multi-family, professional offices, and commercial uses. The remainder of the property surrounding the expanded area consists houses and vacant lots zoned R-4 Two Family. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On April 18, 2003, multiple changes were made from Industrial, Public Institutional, and Commercial to Light Industrial along Roosevelt Road east of Springer Boulevard starting about 1 mile east of the applicant’s property. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-02 2 On April 18, 2003, a change was made from Public Institutional to Single Family east of the I-30 / I-630 interchange starting a little less than 1 mile northeast of the application area. On April 18, 2003, multiple changes were made from Single Family, Commercial, Mixed Use, Public Institutional, Light Industrial, Park / Open Space, Single Family, and Industrial to Service Trades District, Public Institutional, and Commercial in an area along Roosevelt Road east of I-30 about a ½ mile east of the amendment area to recognize existing conditions. On January 4, 2000 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use at 2311 Spring Street less than ¼ of a mile northwest of the study area to accommodate proposed development. The applicant’s property and all of the properties in the expanded area are shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. The area north of Roosevelt Road is shown as Multifamily. The area to the east is shown as Mixed Use on Roosevelt and Single Family to the south. The areas to the south and west are shown as Single Family. MASTER STREET PLAN: Center Street is classified as a standard residential street and is built to Master Street Plan specifications. There are no bikeways shown that would be affected by this amendment. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 includes public school property, such as the Washington Magnet Elementary School 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. The plan also shows South Little Rock Park located across the street from the school at 2701 S. Main Street as a mini-park of 2.0 + acres in size designed to serve residents located in the immediate vicinity of the park. This amendment should not have an effect on existing park facilities since the amendment area would be accessed primarily from an area located north of the park facilities and should not increase traffic or the population of the neighborhood. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-02 3 CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The applicant’s property is located in an area covered by the South End Area Improvement Plan “A Neighborhood Action Plan”. The Office and Commercial Development Goal lists an action statement of encouraging more restaurants to locate in the area. The Residential Development goal lists an objective of introducing new housing stock into the neighborhood and lists an action statement of developing vacant lots with new housing. ANALYSIS: The applicant’s property is isolated from other non-residential uses. Most of the non-residential uses in this neighborhood are located in nodes at the intersections of Roosevelt Road with Arch, Broadway, and Main Streets. The nodes are organized in such a manner that Commercial uses are located at the center of the nodes at the intersections. The less intense uses such as Mixed Use, Office, and Public Institutional form a transition between the Commercial uses and areas shown as Single Family or Multi-family. This application would increase the Mixed Use shown at Roosevelt and Louisiana in such a manner that it could reduce the potential for new housing and increase non-residential along the south side of Roosevelt Road. The houses located along Center Street are oriented towards the street, shown as a residential street. The residential design standards for Center Street is intended to accommodate 2,500 vehicles per day. Any non-residential development oriented toward Center Street would need to be designed in a way that would account for possible increases in traffic. A change to Mixed Use opens the potential for development of non-residential uses, which would not have frontage along an arterial, or Collector Street. The expanded area abuts an area that would remain as Single Family due to the hillside on the west side of Spring Street, which provides a physical separation between uses located on Spring Street and uses to the west. In addition, non- residential uses locating on Spring Street are not likely since the street does not intersect Roosevelt Road. A change to Mixed Use requires non-residential uses on Center Street to develop through the Planned Zoning Development Process. Any PZD approved for non-residential uses on Center Street would need to be implemented in a way that would protect the integrity of the neighboring residential uses. The expanded area sits across the street from an area within by the Capitol Zoning District. The zoning district is intended to preserve the neighborhood December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-02 4 surrounding the Governor’s Mansion. However, the amendment area would not be affected by the regulations of the zoning district due to its location outside the district’s boundaries. Nevertheless, any development located in the amendment area would need to respect the character of the neighborhood north of Roosevelt Road. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Coalition of LR Neighborhoods, Downtown Neighborhood Association, Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association, Central High Neighborhood Association, Coalition of SE Neighborhoods, 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, Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association, Quapaw Quarter Assoc. (No contact currently available at this time), MacArthur Park Neighborhood Association, and Community Outreach Neighborhood Organization. Staff has received one comment from area residents. The comment received was neutral. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This application would introduce non-residential uses oriented toward a residential street contrary to the current development pattern of the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 2003) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the Commission. Donna James made a presentation of item 23.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item 23. See item 23.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned Commercial Development. Mary Alford of the Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association opposes the item. She spoke of less traffic in the neighborhood since the restaurant closed. Ricky Dawson opposes the application and lives across Center Street. He spoke of trash that was left by the customers. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-08-02 5 Deborah Dawson also lives across the street and opposes the application. She spoke of the traffic being backed up by the customers parked in the middle of the street. Charlotte Lockhart lives at 28th and Center and opposes the application. She stated that she built a new house and the traffic forced her to take Main Street to go to her house instead of coming straight down Center Street. Nat Conway, the applicant, spoke in favor of the application. He stated the business had been there since 1942. He spoke of the trash problems, prostitutes in the neighborhood, crack houses nearby and the boarded up houses. Commissioner Allen asked for the applicant to describe how the business would be an asset to the neighborhood. Mr. Conway responded that it would be a new building and provided a place for people to go. Commissioner Lowry asked about the loud music in the streets. Mr. Conway responded that he had no control over what happed in the street. He stated that he has worked with the policemen on different occasions, but it did not stop. Commissioner Mizan asked how long he had been operating the business. Mr. Conway stated since 1981. Commissioner Mizan asked if he could relocate somewhere else in the area. Mr. Conway stated that he owned that property and that he would have to buy property elsewhere and get it zoned. Commissioner Williams asked the hours of operation. The reply was from 11 or 12 in the morning till 10 at night. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning, stated that Donna James, Dana Carney and he were part of a team that boarded houses earlier in the year with the Housing Department in an effort to curb vandalism in the area. He stated that this area has had reinvestment in the recent past. He stated that the restaurant/club could kill the possibility of new homes in the area. Commissioner Meyer commented about the lack of parking in the application. A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 23.1 FILE NO.: Z-7531 NAME: Griffin Short-form PCD LOCATION: 2512 Center Street DEVELOPER: Nat L. Conway 6605 Sterling Drive Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Dee Wilson Surveying 2523 North Willow North Little Rock, AR 72114 AREA: 0.16 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-4, Two-family District ALLOWED USES: Duplex PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Café VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Waiver of the hard surface parking area. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R-4 to PD-C to allow the construction of a café on the site. A non-conforming café was located on the site December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7531 2 and was destroyed by fire several years ago. The applicant has indicated a desire to reconstruct the building. The proposed building is 4200 square feet and will have a bar area, kitchen and a seating capacity of 50 customers. The applicant has indicated the placement of seven (7) on-site parking spaces. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the requirement to install a hard surface parking area. The applicant is also requesting a reduction in the required land use buffer per the zoning ordinance. The proposal includes a landscape strip of five (5) feet. The typical minimum required land use buffer is six (6) feet nine (9) inches. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant as is the area to the area to the south of the site. On Center Street between Roosevelt Road and 26th Street there are only three structures. Two of the structures are occupied as single-family homes and the third has been boarded for security proposes. To the west of the site there are six single- family homes in the same block area all of which are occupied. Other uses in the area included non-residential uses along Roosevelt Road with the Big Apple Shopping Center located at the intersection of Roosevelt Road and Broadway. There is a vacant commercial building which once housed a restaurant on the northwest corner of Roosevelt Road and Center Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Downtown Neighborhood Association, the East of Broadway 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. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. Show parking layout that will use alley access. Alley may have to be improved to provide adequate access. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, grease trap required. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7531 3 Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. 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 Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development to rebuild a café. A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (Item # 23 – File No. LU03-08-02). Landscape: The proposed structure encroaches into the minimum six (6) foot nine (9) inch wide land use buffer area along the northern and southern perimeters. Additionally, the proposed parking area must provide for the minimum six (6) foot nine (9) inch wide landscape buffers along the northern and southern perimeters required by both the landscape and zoning ordinances. 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 and southern perimeters of the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7531 4 These requirements take into account the reductions allowed within the designated mature area. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property is located in an area covered by the South End Area Improvement Plan “A Neighborhood Action Plan”. The Office and Commercial Development Goal lists an action statement of encouraging more restaurants to locate in the area. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Nat L. Griffin was present representing the request. Staff briefly described the proposed development indicating the request was to reconstruct a café, which was destroyed by fire. Staff stated the use had functioned as a non- conforming use prior to being destroyed. Staff requested Mr. Griffin provide additional information with regard to days and hours of operation, the estimated number of employees and the seating capacity of the restaurant. Staff also stated the parking area should be constructed of a hard surface material or a waiver be requested from the Commission to allow a gravel parking area. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff requested the applicant provide the proposed parking layout and access. Staff stated the alley may have to be improved to provide adequate access to the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed site plan did not meet the minimum required landscaping strips per the zoning ordinance or the landscape ordinance. Staff suggested the applicant meet with them to resolve address this issue. There being no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated seven on-site parking spaces and a landscape strip of five feet along the north and south property lines. The proposed building is 4200 square feet and will have a bar area, kitchen and a seating capacity of 50 customers. The applicant has indicated the placement of seven (7) on-site parking spaces. The typical minimum required parking for a restaurant of this size would be 42 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated over-flow parking could be on the street. For commercially zoned sites, staff does not allow street parking to count toward fulfilling the minimum required December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7531 5 parking. Based on previous experience with restaurants/bar establishments staff feels the proposed parking is no where near adequate to meet the typical parking demand. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the requirement to install a hard surface parking area. The zoning ordinance requires all parking areas to be constructed of a hard surface material. The applicant has indicated cross ties to contain the gravel to serve as the parking material. Staff is not supportive of the waiver of the hard surface parking area. Even with containment gravel tends to track on to city rights-of-way and the parking area tends to deteriorate. Staff would recommend the parking be constructed as required per the zoning ordinance or of a hard surface material. The applicant is also requesting a reduction in the required land use buffer per the zoning ordinance. Both the zoning ordinance and the landscape ordinance require a minimum landscape strip along the northern and southern perimeters of six feet nine includes. The proposal only includes a landscape strip of five (5) feet. Staff is not supportive of the reduced landscape strip. The adjoining properties are zoned residentially and the increased landscaping is necessary to screen the adjoining properties should they redevelop as residential units. The applicant has not indicated improvements to the alley. The existing alley indicates a 20-foot right-of-way but the alley appears to be only 10-feet of pavement. In addition the alley is broken in places and needs to be repair if the alley is going to serve as access to the applicant’s parking lot. Staff is not supportive of this request. Staff feels the proposed development is too intense and does not meet the minimum requirements of the existing ordinances. Staff feels the applicant is trying to overbuild the site. There are single-family homes located to the west of the site. These homes also access the alleyway the applicant intends utilize to access the parking area. In addition, the site is located in the heart of a single-family neighborhood, which is very fragile and if measures are not taken to preserve the neighborhood, deterioration will continue. The site is located near Roosevelt Road where there is abundant vacant property, which could be developed as a commercial use. The site is located in an area where there are a number of vacant homes and vacant lots but not three blocks from this site on Center Street there are new homes currently under construction. Staff feels to allow this development to locate on the site would further erode the neighborhood and halt future development of single-family homes. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request to rezone the site from single-family to Planned Commercial Development. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7531 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Nat Conway was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff made a brief presentation to the Commission concerning Items #23 (the Future Land Use Plan Amendment) and Item #23.1 (the rezoning request). See Item #23 for a complete discussion concerning the Future Land Use Plan Amendment. Ms. Mary Alford of the Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association addressed the Commission in opposition of the item. She stated there was less traffic in the neighborhood since the restaurant/club had closed. Mr. Ricky Dawson addressed the Commission in opposition of the application. He stated his residence was across Center Street from the club. He stated there was litter and trash generated by the customers of the club and left in his yard. Ms. Deborah Dawson stated she also lived across the street and from the club and was opposed to the application. She stated customers would park in the middle of the street when the club was operational and back up traffic. Ms. Charlotte Lockhart stated she lived at East 28th Street and Center Street and was opposed to the application. She stated that she had built a new house and the traffic forced her to take Main Street to go to her house instead of coming straight down Center Street. Mr. Nat Conway, the applicant, addressed the Commission on the merits of the application. He stated the business had been there since 1942. He stated there were trash problems, prostitutes in the neighborhood, crack houses nearby and the boarded up houses. He stated the new construction would be a positive to the neighborhood. Commissioner Allen asked the applicant to describe how the business would be an asset to the neighborhood. Mr. Conway responded that it would be a new building and provided a place for people to go for food and entertainment. Commissioner Lowry questioned the loud music in the street. Mr. Conway responded that he had no control over what happed in the street. He stated that he has worked with the Police Department on different occasions, but had not been able to stop the loitering. Commissioner Mizan asked how long he had been operating the business. Mr. Conway stated since 1981. Commissioner Mizan asked if he could relocate somewhere in the area. Mr. Conway stated that he owned that property and to relocate would require him to purchase property and possibly request zoning for the new site also. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7531 7 Commissioner Williams asked the hours of operation. Mr. Conway stated from 11 am or 12 pm until 10 pm. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning, stated that Donna James, Dana Carney and he were part of a team that boarded houses earlier in the year with the Housing Department in an effort to curb vandalism in the area. He stated that the area had seen reinvestment in the recent past. Mr. Lawson stated the restaurant/club could possibly kill the new home construction in the area. Commissioner Meyer commented about the lack of parking proposed with the application. A motion was made to approve the rezoning request as presented. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 24 FILE NO.: LU03-09-04 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-630 Planning District Location: 1100 S. Van Buren Street Request: Single Family to Office Source: Pat McGetrick, McGetrick & McGetrick PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the I-630 Planning District from Single Family to Office. The Office category represents services provided directly to consumers (e.g., legal, financial, medical) as well as general offices, which support more basic economic activities. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the south side of W. 11th Street from Harrison Street to the area shown as Park / Open Space along Jonesboro Drive and would double the area currently shown as office on the north side of W. 12th Street. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is a house currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is about 0.15 acres ± in size. The property in the expanded area consists of houses zoned R-3 Single Family while the area to the north consists of the same. The area east of the study area is a strip of land zoned PR Parks and Recreation for the south entrance to War Memorial Park. Medical offices zoned O-3 General Office occupy the lots to the south of the study area. The medical clinics to the southwest at the intersection of W. 12th and Harrison Street are zoned C-3 General Commercial. The vacant land zoned O-3 General Office sits west of the expanded area. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On March 5, 2002 a change was made from Commercial and Office to Mixed Use at University and Markham Street about 1 mile northwest of the expanded area to recognize existing conditions. On July 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family to Park / Open Space at Oak Forest Park about 1/3 of a mile southwest of the applicant’s property to recognize existing conditions. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-09-04 2 On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Public Institutional in the 1700 block of Pine Street about 1 mile southeast of the amendment property to recognize existing conditions. On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use along W. 12th Street west of Woodrow Street starting about 1 mile east of the property in question to recognize existing conditions. On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use on the south side of W. 11th Street between Lewis and Elm Street about 1/3 of a mile east of the amendment area to recognize existing conditions. On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use on W. 18th Street at Pine Street more than ¾ of a mile southeast of the study area to recognize existing conditions. On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use on W. 20th Street at Pine Street about 1 mile southeast of the applicant’s property to recognize existing conditions. On April 20, 1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed Use on W. 23rd Street at Cedar Street about 1 mile southeast of the amendment property to recognize existing conditions. The applicant’s property and the expanded area are shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. The property north of the study area is shown as Single Family. The property east of the study area is shown as Park / Open Space. The property south of the study area is shown as Office. The property west of the study area is shown as Mixed Use. MASTER STREET PLAN: Van Buren and W. 11th Street are classified as standard residential streets and are built to standard. 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 portion of War Memorial Park is located a block east of the application area along Jonesboro Drive to serve as the park entrance. The plan describes War Memorial Park as providing special facilities such as the zoo, fitness center, and a golf course designed to serve the entire city. This amendment is not likely to affect the large facilities at War Memorial Park. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-09-04 3 HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no 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 Oak Forest Area Neighborhood Action Plan “A Guide to Achieve Our Vision”. The Housing objectives states to “Encourage more home ownership” and to “Enhance and maintain all housing stock”. This action would remove housing stock. ANALYSIS: The applicant’s property is located on the edge of a fragile neighborhood. The Single Family currently shown recognizes the houses along both sides of W. 11th Street between Van Buren and Harrison Streets and establishes the boundary between residential and non-residential uses half-way between W. 11th and W. 12th Streets. The properties on both sides of W. 11th Street are oriented toward the street. Although conflicting uses are located next to each other, the houses along the south side of W. 11th Street and the non-residential uses along W. 12th Street face opposite directions. This application would allow conflicting residential and non-residential uses to face each other along W. 11th Street. Office developments locating in the amendment area could be oriented towards, and accessed from, W. 11th Street. This change would introduce intense uses fronting a residential area. Since the Office category allows intense office uses, the traffic on W. 11th Street would be increased during business hours. The residential design standards for west W. 11th Street and Van Buren Streets are intended to accommodate 2,500 vehicles per day. The Office category is broad enough to allow uses that could generate more traffic than intended for residential streets. Any Office development along the south side of W. 11th Street would need to be designed in a way that would account for possible increases in traffic. A change to Office would also challenge the residential integrity of the neighborhood through the possible introduction of uses that might not have limited hours of operation. While many office uses would be limited to business hours, it is conceivable for certain types of office uses to have auxiliary operations such as 24-hour ATM machines. Any office development along the south side of W. 11th Street would need to respect the residential integrity of the neighborhood by limiting the amount of light and noise that could have a negative impact on neighboring residences. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-09-04 4 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association, Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association, Curran-Conway Neighborhood Association, Forest Hills Neighborhood Association, Goodwill Neighborhood Association, Hope Neighborhood Association, Love Neighborhood Association, Midway Neighborhood Association, Oak Forest Neighborhood Association, Pine to Woodrow Neighborhood Association, S. O. A. Neighborhood Association, Stephens Area Faith Neighborhood Association, War Memorial Neighborhood Association, Oak Forest Acorn, Oak Forest Initiative, Briarwood Neighborhood Association, Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association, Broadmoor Neighborhood Association, Point O'Woods Neighborhood Association, and University Park Neighborhood Association. Staff has received one comment from area residents. The comment received was neutral. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This change would introduce an incompatible use into a fragile residential area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 2003) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the Commission. Donna James made a presentation of item 24.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item 24. See item 24.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned Office Development. Pat McGetrick spoke as the applicant and stated that Staff had expanded the Land Use Plan application and that his client’s property was in the center. He has sited the building so that it would face Van Buren and not 11th Street so that traffic on 11th should not be increased. The building will resemble a single-family house in architecture. The operation will have 8 – 5 business hours. Commissioner Mizan spoke of the difference in a theoretical application to the west. Donna James spoke of the difference in regards to the traffic concerns. Jim Lawson, Planning Director, stated that Staff was not in support of changing the recommendation on the Land Use Plan Amendment but was changing the recommendation on the POD. A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes, and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 24.1 FILE NO.: Z-7532 NAME: Faithland Properties Short-form POD LOCATION: 1100 South Van Buren Street DEVELOPER: Pam Courtney 5100 West 12th Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 0.16 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family District ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: General and Professional Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 2,250 square foot office building on this single fifty by one hundred fifty foot lot. The applicant has indicated the user will December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7532 2 be Quiet Office uses (general and professional office uses). The applicant has indicated five on-site parking spaces and the hours of operation to be from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Saturday. The maximum building height proposed is 25-feet. The applicant has indicated the structure will be constructed to emulate a single-family home in architectural design. The primary difference is the number of parking spaces in the front of the home. The site will be accessed by Van Buren Street. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant cleared lot currently zoned R-3. The area to the south of the site along West 12th Street is primarily non-residential uses; both office and commercial uses. There is an existing vacant single-family home located on the southeast corner of West 12th Street and Van Buren Street. There is a medical clinic located on Van Buren Street just southeast of the site. The medical clinic has an adjoining parking lot accessed by West 12th Street. A PD-O was recently reviewed and approved to allow a building to be constructed for a medical file storage area at the eastern perimeter of the parking lot. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed development. The Forest Hills Neighborhood Association, the Hope Neighborhood Association, the Oak Forest Neighborhood Association, the War Memorial Neighborhood Associations, 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. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of 11th and Van Buren Streets. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 3. Storm water detention ordinance will not apply to the proposed development. 4. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7532 3 Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. 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 I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development - Office for a quiet office. A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda (Item No. 24 – File No. LU03-09-04). Landscape: The proposed street buffer width along Van Buren Street is less than the minimum six (6) feet nine (9) inches required by both the zoning and landscaping ordinances. Additionally, the width of the proposed landscape perimeter strip south at the proposed on-site paved area is less than the six (6) foot nine (9) inch minimum allowed by the landscape ordinance. The width of the proposed land use buffer west of the proposed structure is less than the six (6) foot nine (9) inch minimum allowed by the zoning ordinance. These requirements take into account the reductions allowed within the designated mature area. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest Area Neighborhood Action Plan “A Guide to Achieve Our Vision”. The Housing objectives states to “Encourage more home ownership” and to “Enhance and maintain all housing stock”. This action would remove housing stock. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development to the Committee members. Staff stated there were additional items needed to complete the review of the proposed December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7532 4 development. Staff requested Mr. McGetrick provide the location of any proposed dumpster and details concerning any proposed signage. Staff also questioned if the facility would be used as a medical clinic. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would not apply to the proposed development. Staff also requested the applicant provide a 20-foot radial dedication at the intersection of West 11th Street and Van Buren Street. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed buffer width along Van Buren Street was less than the minimum six (6) feet nine (9) inch requirement. Staff also noted the landscape strip south of the proposed paved parking area fell below the minimum allowed; also six (6) feet nine (9) inches. 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 identified at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a seven foot landscape strip along the southern perimeter of the site. The applicant has also increased the street buffer along Van Buren Street to a minimum eight feet and two inches to satisfy both the zoning and landscape ordinance requirements. The applicant has indicated a front building setback sufficient to meet the typical minimum required front yard setback per the zoning ordinance for O-1, Quiet Office District along Van Buren Street. The applicant has indicated a seven foot setback on the rear, which typically requires a twenty-five foot setback. The side yard setback (on the south) is seven feet, which is adequate to meet the typical minimum side yard setback required for a lot seventy feet in width. The setback along West 11th Street is inadequate to meet the typical minimum required setback. The applicant has indicated a fifteen foot setback along West 11th Street. Street side setbacks are typically required to be twenty-five feet. Staff is not supportive of the reduced setbacks for the site. The applicant has indicated five on-site parking spaces. The typical minimum required parking for a 1,920 square foot office building would be 4 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated the site will be developed for an office use that will have no customer traffic to the site. The site will be used for accounts receivable and accounts payable for an adjoining medical office. The proposed parking should be adequate to serve the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7532 5 The applicant is proposing the hours to be from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Saturday. The proposed hours are consistent with office hours in the area. The applicant has indicated there will not be an on-site dumpster. Staff is not supportive of the proposed development. The site is located in an area shown as single-family on the Future Land Use Plan. In the past staff has drawn a hard line along West 12th Street, maintaining commercial uses in this area and preserving the residential character of the neighborhood. Allowing the site to develop as an office use would allow the area to be opened for additional non-residential uses along West 11th Street. Currently, the non-residential uses extending beyond West 12th Street stop at Van Buren Street and the predominate use along West 11th Street is single-family. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Plan (Item #24) and the rezoning request (Item #24.1). See Item #24 for a complete discussion concerning the Future Land Use Plan. Mr. Pat McGetrick addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant stating Staff had expanded the Land Use Plan application and that his client’s property was located in the center of the plan amendment. Mr. McGetrick stated the building was oriented Van Buren Street and not West 11th Street to reduced the intrusion into the residential component of the neighborhood and to reduce non-residential traffic on West 11th Street. He stated the building would resemble a single-family house in architecture. He stated the business was a bookkeeping service and there would be no customer traffic to the site. Mr. McGetrick stated the hours of operation would be from 8 am until 5 pm. Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning, stated staff was changing their recommendation based on the information Mr. McGetrick had provided. He stated the building orientation and the use would limit the negative impact on the adjoining properties. He stated staff would recommend the application be revised to a PD-O a single use development for the specified uses. Mr. Lawson stated Mr. McGetrick had not submitted a proposed building elevation and staff would work with him to determine if December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7532 6 the structure was compatible to the neighborhood. Mr. Lawson stated if staff had concerns with the compatibility then they would return the item to the Commission. Commissioner Mizan questioned the difference in a theoretical application to the west. Staff stated the difference was orientation and traffic. Staff stated the proposed use would not generate traffic into the neighborhood since there would be little to no customer traffic. Jim Lawson, Planning Director, stated that Staff was not in support of changing the recommendation on the Land Use Plan Amendment but was recommending the proposed zoning be approved as a PD-O. A motion was made to approve the item as amended and recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 25 FILE NO.: Z-7534 NAME: Trent Properties Short-form POD LOCATION: 15800 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: David and Mary Trent 15800 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock AR 72201 AREA: 0.21 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: General and Professional Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the conversion of an exiting 711 square foot single- family home to an office use (general and professional office). The proposed site plan indicates four (4) parking spaces with a turn-around. The site contains 0.21 December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7534 2 acres. The applicant has indicated a single ground-mounted sign, which will comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. The proposed days and hours of operation are from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The site plan indicates screening along the eastern and western perimeters. The applicant is requesting the required screening along the northern perimeter not be installed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a small single-family home. There are non-residential uses located south of the site; an office park, agricultural nursery and an antique/gift shop. There is a large floodway located north and east of the site. The site is currently zoned R-2, Single-family and is functioning as a single-family home. The City’s Future Land Use Plan indicates PK/OS for the site, with the area south of the site shown as Transition. As indicated the site is adjacent to a floodway but not located in the floodway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Johnson Ranch 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 existing right-of-way dedication meets the Master Street Plan requirements for this project. 2. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 3. The parking arrangement must be re-designed to allow turning around of vehicles on-site. No backing out onto Cantrell Road. 4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan in conjunction with the parking lot construction. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7534 3 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: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water to have the rate on the water account changed to commercial if this property is converted to commercial use. 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 River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Parks and Open Space for this property. The PK/OS was established to follow the floodway of several waterways in this area. The site is not located in the floodway but adjacent to the floodway. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development to convert a house into an office. Since the areas to the south and the west are shown as Transition on the Future Land Use Plan staff feels the use appropriate, bearing in mind the Future Land Use Plan is general in nature. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Landscape: 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 perimeters of the site. Screening along the northern perimeter may be deemed inappropriate because of the adjacent floodway. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7534 4 City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan does not list goals, objectives, or action statements relevant to this case. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant redesign the parking area to allow a turn-around for automobiles on-site not forcing them to back onto Cantrell Road. Staff also requested information with regard to dumpster location, site lighting and signage. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the existing right-of-way met with the Master Street Plan requirement for Cantrell Road. Staff also noted a grading permit for Flood Hazard Areas would be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a six foot high opaque screen would be required along the northern, eastern and western perimeters of the site. Staff stated the screening along the northern perimeter may be deemed inappropriate because of the adjacent floodway. Mr. McGetrick questioned the placement of the fence along the eastern and western perimeter. Staff stated the fence was to be installed to the floodway line. 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 November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the uses for the site will be quiet office uses or general and professional office type uses. The applicant has also indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site and any additional site lighting will be low level in intensity and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned property and the Highway 10 Corridor. The applicant has indicated four (4) parking spaces on-site with a turn-around contained on the site. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking configuration. The building is approximately 711 square feet, typically requiring only two (2) parking spaces. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7534 5 The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. The proposed hours of operation are consistent with other businesses in the area. Staff is supportive of the requested hours of operation. The applicant has indicated the signage to consist of wall signage for the proposed development and a single ground mounted monument style sign. The applicant has indicated the wall signage will comply with signage allowed in office zones or not to exceed ten percent of the aggregate sign area for the occupant’s façade area. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted monument style sign to comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements, or not to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated screening along the eastern and western perimeters of the site. The applicant is requesting screening not be required along the northern perimeter of the site. Staff is supportive of this request. The northern perimeter abuts a heavily wooded floodway and staff feels requiring screening in this area would serve no purpose. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The site is located across from an office/business park (Seven Acres Business Park) and east of a feed store. There are two large agricultural nurseries located south and east of the site. Staff feels the proposed office use is consistent with the development pattern of the 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered 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. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 26 FILE NO.: Z-3606-B NAME: Parker Cadillac Body Shop Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: 11607 Rainwood Road DEVELOPER: Parker Luxury Automobiles 1700 North Shackleford Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: Norris Jerald Sparks Architect 62 Berkshire Drive Little Rock, AR 72204 AREA: 0.857 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Automobile Paint and Body Shop PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Automobile Paint and Body Shop VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No 16,697 on June 21, 1994, which established Parker Cadillac Body Shop Short-form PCD. The site was to contain a paint and body repair facility to consolidate the Cadillac, Lexus and Saturn paint and December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3606-B 2 body repair facilities of the greater Little Rock area. The applicant also requested C-3 uses as alternative uses for the site. The application was amended at the Planning Commission meeting to eliminate the request for alternative uses. The applicant indicated in the proposal the building was to be constructed with “superior character and appearance that he has achieved in the architectural contribution of the Cadillac and Lexus dealerships.” The applicant also indicated “plans to invest in a handsome building with abundant landscaping and street appeal….” The facility was to be “state-of-the-art” facility and house automotive paint and repair equipment and processes that were the most technically advanced in the industry. The site plan included a six foot masonry and wood fence at the perimeter of the rear of the site to restrict both access and the view of the automobile storage area from neighbors. The front automobile access door would be closed at all times, except when an automobile was being delivered. The applicant also indicated noise would be minimal since most of the parts were being replaced rather than re-used. The applicant indicated the hours of operation to be from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm. The applicant indicated there were to be no delivery trucks accessing the site bringing parts. The applicant indicated trash would be collected three times per week and the retrieval would be from interior bins. The applicant stated there was to be no litter on the site. The approved site plan included a 12-bay repair facility, 6 bay paint area and a 22 car holding space at the rear. Other conditions included, a narrower drive than desirable to comply with the City Engineering requirements, an eight-foot high decorative fence at the perimeter of the rear service area, extensive landscaping to increase street appeal of the site, less than desirable parking at the front of the building, no parking along the west wall of the building and park only finished cars at the southeast corner of the lot. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to revise the previously approved Planned Development to allow employee cars to be parked along the west wall of the building and to allow wrecked autos to be stored on the southeast corner of the lot. The applicant has indicated the east gate is the only entrance for tow trucks delivering vehicles to the site. The applicant has indicated because of the limited space the gates, need to remain open during business hours. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3606-B 3 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The area is a mix of residential, commercial and office uses. The area is predominately developed with commercial and office uses although the area to the north of the site is developed as patio homes. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Birkshire Park Townhomes Property Owners 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. ANALYSIS: Zoning enforcement found the site in non-compliance and issue a notice to the owner on August 6, 2003. The enforcement officer found wrecked automobiles being stored at the southeast corner of the lot. There were also employees parking on the west wall of the building. The enforcement officer also found auto parts on the ground in the rear of the building. The manager of the facility was not aware of these issues being violations and corrected as many as possible prior to a second visit on August 21, 2003. The applicant is requesting a revision to the PCD to allow employees to park on the west side of the building and to store wrecked automobiles on the east side of the lot behind the wood gate. The applicant is requesting to allow three employees to park their personal vehicles along the western wall of the building. In addition the applicant has indicated the business is growing resulting in the need to expand the storage area. The applicant has also indicated with the location of the gates and accessibility for the tow trucks there is a need to expand into this area. The applicant agreed at the May 17, 1994 Public Hearing to a list of conditions to received approval of this request. There were ten conditions listed, one of which, was that the front overhead doors would remain closed at all times except when automobiles were being delivered. The applicant also agreed to construct wood gates at the drives, which were to be closed off at night. The applicant also agreed that only finished vehicles would be parked at the southeast corner of the lot. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3606-B 4 The body shop hours of operation were approved from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm. There was not a limit placed on the delivery hours of wrecked vehicles to the site and due to the nature of the business one would assume deliveries are made to the site during non-business hours. Staff is supportive of the request. The placement of three employee automobiles along the western wall of the building should have no impact on the area. If the site were being used as an office building one would expect automobiles to be parked in this area. The applicant is also requesting to place wrecked cars in the southeastern portion of the lot. Staff is also supportive of this request. The area abuts non- residential uses to the south and east and is screened with a wood fence. Staff dose not feel the addition of wrecked inventory in this area would have any negative impact on the area. The applicant has not requested to revise any of the previously approved conditions, i.e. the overhead door remaining closed at all times with the exception of when automobiles are being delivered. Staff recommends this condition remain as a condition of approval. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request to allow three employee automobiles to be parked along the west wall of the building and to allow wrecked automobiles to be stored in the southeastern area of the site. Staff also recommends all other previous conditions continue to apply to the development. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Rick Parker was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant was requesting a revision to allow three (3) employees to park along the west wall and to allow wrecked automobiles to be parked in the southeast corner of the lot. Staff stated the neighborhood had expressed concerns with the gates being left open and the parking of cars in that area. Staff stated the neighborhoods concerns were that the automobiles would be visible from the street. Staff noted the gates were not required to be closed during business hours. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3606-B 5 Mr. Parker requested his application be amended to only include the request for the addition of the parking of three employee cars along the west wall of the building. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 27 FILE NO.: Z-6926-A NAME: My Little School Revised Short-form PD-O LOCATION: On the southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Norton Road DEVELOPER: Chris Flake 3709 Idlewild North Little Rock, AR 72116 ENGINEER: The Mehlburger Firm P.O. Box 3837 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 0.812 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-O ALLOWED USES: Daycare Facility PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-O PROPOSED USE: Daycare Facility VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,402 adopted December 12, 2000, by the Little Rock Board of Directors established My Little School Short-form PD-O located on the southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Norton Road. The site was originally zoned R-2 which would December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6926-A 2 typically require a Conditional Use Permit to allow the site to develop with a daycare facility but since the site is located in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and the site is less than two acres, a Planned Development was sought. The approved plan included the development of a 6,000 square foot daycare facility with a maximum building height of 24-feet. The applicant indicated a total of 31 parking spaces with a single access point along Norton Road. The applicant indicated a total of 148 children and the hours of operation to be from 5:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. The site is located in an unincorporated island of the City. The applicant’s property is not contiguous to the city limits and he tried unsuccessfully to annex by encouraging contiguous property owners to request annexation into the City. The applicant has secured from the City Manger’s Office an agreement to extend sewer to the site by signing a pre-annexation agreement. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to revise the previously approved PD-O to allow the construction of a 7,000 square foot building on the site and to be allowed a room upstairs. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height will be 28- feet. The applicant has indicated there will not be a change in the number of children served at the facility or the days and hours of operation. The applicant is also requesting should the current request not be approved a one-year time extension to allow construction of the existing approved site plan to begin. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and mostly covered with brush and weeds. There are single-family homes located to the south and across Norton Road to the west. There is a mixture of commercial and residential uses and zoning to the north across Cantrell Road and to the east along Cantrell Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed development. The Johnson Ranch 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. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6926-A 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. All previous comments apply to this minor revision (building expansion). 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: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Water main extensions will be required for this project. 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 the 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 Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a Planned Development - Office for a two-story building. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6926-A 4 Landscape: The plan submitted does not provide for the forty (40) foot wide landscape buffer along Cantrell Road nor the fifteen (15) foot wide landscape buffer along Norton Road required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay Ordinance. The Planning Commission previously approved these reductions. Areas set aside for landscaping meet with landscape ordinance requirements. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 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. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Chris Flake was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to revise a previously approved Planned Development to allow the construction of a 7,000 square foot building and to allow the structure to be two (2) story. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the proposed development with regard to the number of children to be served, the days and hours of operation and the maximum building height. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted all previous comments would apply to the proposed development. Staff stated Norton Road would require a dedication of right-of-way 30-feet from the centerline and sidewalks would be required along Cantrell Road. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed development did not allow for the forty (40) foot wide landscape buffer along Cantrell Road nor the fifteen foot wide landscape buffer along Norton Road as required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff noted the Planning Commission previously approved the reduced standards. 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 addressed most of the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height to be 28-feet. The applicant has stated there will be one room upstairs but the structure will not be two stories. The room will be more of a finished attic space to be used as an office or as an activity room for older children. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6926-A 5 The applicant has stated the site will serve a maximum of 151 children and the hours of operation are from 6:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant has also indicated screening around the dumpster as required per the zoning ordinance or at least two feet above the finished top of the container. As noted, the site is less than the two acre minimum lot size as typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. As was previously approved, the site contains reduced setbacks from property lines and reduced landscape buffers. The following are typical requirements and the proposed development data as relates to the current application: HIGHWAY 10 OVERLAY DISTRICT PROPOSED front building setback 100 feet 57 feet to 75 feet rear building setback 40 feet 40 feet side building setback (east) 30 feet 21 feet side building setback (west) 30 feet 83 feet landscape buffer (north) 40 feet 9 feet to 57 feet landscape buffer (south) 25 feet 25 foot avg. landscape buffer (east) 25 feet 25 foot avg. landscape buffer (west) 15 feet 9 feet The proposed site plan shows a total of 31 parking spaces to serve the proposed development. A daycare of this size would typically require a minimum of 31 parking spaces. The proposed site plan also shows a ground mounted monument style sign along the front property line. The applicant has not indicated the area of the proposed sign on the site plan. Staff recommends the sign be set back at least five feet from the front property line and the sign not exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. The site plan includes landscaping along Cantrell Road, Norton Road and the perimeter of the parking area as required by the new Landscape Ordinance. The plan also shows the screening fence as required along the south and east property lines where adjacent to residentially zoned properties. In addition, the applicant is proposing the placement of a six foot ornamental iron fence with brick columns along the Cantrell Road. The previous approval required the applicant to request a franchise from the State of Arkansas Department of Highway and Transportation Department and or the City if required to install landscaping within a portion of the existing right-of- way. The installation of landscaping in this area will help toward compliance with December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6926-A 6 the typical 40-foot buffer along the front property line. The applicant will be required to submit a landscape plan with a possible berm in the front landscape area to comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements. Based on the fact the lot was previously approved for a daycare center, staff feels the use is appropriate. The applicant has indicated an additional 1000 square feet of building area to be included within the development. The rear setbacks are not reduced because the applicant has taken the area out of the proposed playground area. 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 signage be limited to Highway 10 Design Overlay District standard as noted in paragraph H. Staff recommends the applicant obtain a franchise to allow additional landscaping to be installed within the right-of-way along the north property line. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Chris Flake was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff stated they had received several phone calls in support of 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 recommended signage be limited to Highway 10 Design Overlay District standard as noted in paragraph H and the applicant obtain a franchise to allow additional landscaping to be installed within the right-of-way along the north property line. Mr. Bob Bryant, the registered objector, declined to address the Commission. Commissioner Floyd questioned the proposed parking vs. the required parking for a day care center. Staff stated the applicant would have to address the number of employees and the ages of the children to determine if the parking proposed was adequate. Mr. Flake stated he was currently operating a daycare center in Maumelle and there were no more than sixteen (16) employees on the site at any given time. Mr. Flake stated he would increase the parking along the front of the building. Staff stated they December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6926-A 7 would prefer the applicant not increase the parking if the proposed parking was sufficient. Staff stated they would work with the applicant to ensure the proposed parking was sufficient to meet the needs of the daycare center. There was a general discussion concerning the access to the site and the proposed parking. Staff noted a condition of approval would include no parking along Norton Road. Staff stated they were not comfortable allowing DHS to drive the zoning of the site. Staff stated the applicant had been approved for 151 students but the applicant had agreed to no more than 16 employees on the site at any one time. A maximum of sixteen employees would be all that was allowed along with the number of children up to 151 that sixteen employees could service was all the children that would be allowed. Staff noted the number of employees required for 151 children would not drive the zoning. A motion was made to approve the application as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 28 FILE NO.: Z-4470-C NAME: Chenal Commercial Park (Lot 3R) Short-form PD-C – Time Extension LOCATION: Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Wellington Village Road DEVELOPER: Saturn West LLC. 1700 North Shackelford Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: The Mehlburger Firm 201 South Izard Street Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 4.2 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USES: Auto dealership VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None Requested. BACKGROUND: On November 11, 1999, the Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a proposed revision to a preliminary plat for the Chenal Commercial Park Subdivision to add approximately 1.74 acres to Lot 3 and a request to rezone Lot 3 from O-3 to PD-C to allow an auto dealership. The applicant proposed two (2) buildings for the site. A 15,000 square foot office/showroom/service building and 2,500 square foot auto detail building. The applicant noted the buildings would not exceed 28-feet in height. The Planning December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4470-C 2 Commission placed several conditions on the recommendation of approval, which the applicant agreed to comply with should the Board of Directors approve the request. The conditions were no vehicular display within the first 20-feet of the property on the street sides, the service entry doors were to be located on a side of the building other than the Chenal Parkway side, no test drives were to be taken through the Wellington Village neighborhood, there was to be no body shop located at the site and the proposed hours of operation were to be from 8:00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday – Saturday (no Sunday hours). Ordinance No. 18,187 adopted by the Board of Directors on January 4, 2000 approved the rezoning for the site to allow Parker Cadillac to construct a Saturn car dealership with the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved a one-year time extension on September 19, 2002 for the proposed PD-C. The new expiration of the Planned Development will be January 2004. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant has requested approval by the Planning Commission of a time extension for implementation of the improvements associated with the establishment of the Saturn auto dealership. The applicant has indicated since automobile sales has been slowed since September 11th, Saturn has allowed Parker Cadillac to delay building for up to three years. As a result the applicant respectfully request the Commission allow a one-year time extension of the previously approved PD-C. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and wooded. The property slopes upward slightly from Chenal Parkway and Wellington Village Road. There is a church immediately to the west of the site, with undeveloped O-3 and C-2 zoned property to the north and east, across Wellington Village Road. A home improvement center is located across Chenal Parkway to the south. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no comment from the neighborhood as of this writing. The St. Charles and Parkway Place Property Owners Association were notified of the Public Hearing. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4470-C 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENT/UTILITY COMMENT/SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: This item was not transmitted to agencies for comment or the Subdivision Committee for comment. E. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting an extension of an approved PD-C to allow additional time to begin construction. Although the previous ordinance allowed the Commission the ability to grant two, one-year time extension the current ordinance adopted May 6, 2003 states “ … the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. The applicant may request and the planning commission may grant one extension of time of not more than two-years” [Section 36-454 (e)]. The PD-C will expire January 2004 and the site may be subject to revocation action by the Commission. Staff feels the request is reasonable. The applicant may be granted one two year extension under the current ordinance and the applicant has received a one year time extension. If the applicant is not ready to develop the site by January 2005, the site will be subject to revocation action or the applicant will be required to refile the PD-C to allow development to occur. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested one-year time extension subject to compliance with all conditions previously imposed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. Rick Parker was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested one-year time extension subject to compliance with all conditions previously imposed. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 29 FILE NO.: Z-6120-I NAME: Capitol Hills Apartments Revised Long-form PD-R LOCATION: On the southwest corner of Capitol Hills Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue DEVELOPER: Jay DeHaven 10650 Maumelle Blvd. Maumelle, AR 72113 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 31.85 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-R, Planned Development - Residential ALLOWED USES: Multi-family; 16.57 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Multi-family; 16.57 units per acre – deferral of the street construction of Rushmore Avenue VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Deferral of the street construction of Rushmore Avenue until adjacent Lot 3 is developed. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-I 2 BACKGROUND: On June 20, 1996 the Planning Commission approved a proposal to rezone 42.58+ acres from R-2, Single-family to MF-12, Multi-family. The rezoning request was associated with Capitol Lakes Estates preliminary plat, a 190 + acre development (File No. S-1100). The property shown for Multi-family was located in two tracts lying on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road (Rushmore Avenue), south of a proposed minor arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard). The application was the third version of proposed multi-family zoning associated with Capitol Lakes Estates. The first version consisted of a proposal to zone 31+ acres at the southeast corner of the Capitol Lakes Estates Plat from R-2 to MF-18. Staff was not supportive of the proposed density and the application drew opposition from the residents of Spring Valley Manor Subdivision, which is adjacent to the south. The application was later withdrawn by the applicant at the Planning Commission Public Hearing. The second version consisted of a proposal to zone 33.8+ acres at the intersection of the realigned Cooper Orbit Road and an as yet unnamed minor arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard) from R-2 to MF-12. The proposed multi-family property was in two tracts, a 27+ acre tract lying south of the arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard) and a 7+ acre tract lying north of the arterial. The multi-family property was moved well north of the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision and residents of that neighborhood supported this version. Staff was also able to recommend approval of the application. The density had been reduced from MF-18 to MF-12. The proposed Multi-family property was basically within the body of the Capitol Lakes Estates plat with only a perimeter relationship to the Oasis Renewal Center on the collector street (Rushmore Avenue) and an arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard). There was some opposition to this proposal from the Oasis Renewal Center. The Planning Commission voted to approve this application on April 25, 1996. The applicant continued to work with the Oasis Renewal Center with their concern of locating the 7+ acres of Multi-family property adjacent to their site. After reaching a compromise with the Oasis Center, the applicant withdrew this second application from the Board of Directors’ agenda and filed a third version of the proposed rezoning request. The third version consisted of a proposal to zone 42.58+ acres on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road (Rushmore Avenue) from R-2 to MF-12. The proposed Multi-family property was in two tracts on either side of the new alignment of Cooper Orbit Road, south of the proposed new arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard). The 27+ acre tract lying south of the arterial and west of proposed Cooper Orbit Road is the same as in the second (approved) application. The 7+ acres which was approved on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) was moved to a point south of the arterial, on the east side of the proposed alignment of December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-I 3 Cooper Orbit Road and increased to 14.81 acres. The 7+ acres on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) was to remain zoned R-2 and was shown as a “reserved” tract on the Capitol Lakes Estates Preliminary Plat. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,312 rezoning the property from R-2 to MF-12, with conditions, on November 7, 1996. The conditions were as follows: Any development which occurs on the property described as Tract C, that tract located on the east side of Rushmore Avenue was to be limited to 125 dwelling units, Three acres within the property described as Tract C was to be dedicated as Open Space and not developed, Capitol Lakes Estates was not to be developed prior to implementation of sanitary sewer service, whether brought about through formation of a new sewer improvement district, expansion or the existing sewer improvement district or some other more feasible cooperative alternative, and with respect to that portion of property zoned MF-12 which would front on the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road, a twenty (20) foot natural buffer was to be maintained along the frontage of the newly aligned Cooper Orbit Road. If it became necessary to regrade the buffer zone, the regraded area within the twenty foot buffer strip was to be replanted to a planting density fifty (50) percent greater than that specified in the Little Rock landscaping ordinance. The rezoning contained Tract A, 27.77 acres, from R-2, Single-family to MF-12 and Tract C, 14.81 acres, from R-2, Single-family to MF-12. Ordinance No. 18,496, in June of 2001, established a PRD titled Village on the Lakes Long-form PRD (this rezoning took a part of Tract C 11.59 acres of the 14.81 acres). The development was proposed to be an attached single-family, townhouse development; 11 buildings with a total of 44 single-family residential dwellings on 11.59 acres located east of the proposed Rushmore Avenue. (A proposed density of 5.3 units per acre.) On July 11, 2002 the Commission reviewed a request to rezone the property on the west side of Rushmore Avenue to Planned Development – Residential to allow the development of a 528 unit apartment complex. The applicant proposed the placement of 904 parking spaces within the development. A separate request was also filed for a property zoned MF-12 and located to the east of the PD-R site. The request to rezone the property to the east from MF-12 to R-2 was also approved on July 11, 2002. Both Ordinances were approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors at their August 20, 2002 Public Hearing. Ordinance No. 18,729 rezoned the western MF-12 property to PD-R and Ordinance No. 18,728 rezoned the eastern MF-12 site to R-2. The applicant proposed the PD-R development to be constructed in three phases with 156 units being constructed in Phase of One and Two and 216 units in the third and final phase. Capitol Hills Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue are currently under construction and will be completed with Phase I to allow access to the site. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-I 4 Ordinance No. 18, 898 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 15, 2003 approved a revision to allow the creation of a three lot plat following the previously proposed phasing lines. The applicant indicated all three lots would have public street frontage but access to the public streets only located on Lots 1 and 3. Lot 2 would take access through a cross access easement across Lots 1 and 3. The Lots were numbered according to the previous phase lines. The previous drainage and utility plan did not changed from the original submission. The applicant revised the building placement ever so slightly to allow for landscape strips between lots as required by ordinance. The applicant indicated a cross access parking agreement was not required since each lot has sufficient parking to meet the typical minimum parking demand for multi-family development. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,963 on October 21, 2003, revising the PD-R to allow the placement of two trash compactors on the site. The applicant indicated a private contractor will service the compactors once a week. The applicant stated with the compactors near the entrance this should allow the driver easy accessibility and minimal disturbance of the residents in the early morning hours when the compactors are serviced. The development also destroyed the required land use buffer areas previously proposed on the west and south perimeters of Phase 1 (Lot 1). The request included a restoration plan for the buffer areas. The restoration plan included plantings in the area previously designated as the land use buffer area be replanted at double the plantings required by the landscape ordinance. This included the area to the south and the west on Lot 1 of the development. The approval included planting of all trees of three inch caliper and additional 30-feet of land to the south was to be retained in a conservation easement and the 30-feet along with the buffer remaining on Lot 2 be combined with a tract designated south of Lot 3 to ensure the buffer be maintained in the future. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to phase the construction of Rushmore Avenue at the eastern boundary of the site until Lot 3 is developed. The site was originally approved as a single tract development and was later revised to allow three lots to develop following previously approved phasing lines. The applicant is now requesting since the PD-R for Capitol Hills Apartments was revised to allow the creation of the three lots a deferral of street improvements be granted until the lot abutting the roadway is developed (Lot 3). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered with heavy woods surrounding the site. The property is currently zoned PD-R with the remainder of the area being zoned R-2, Single-family. The Oasis Renewal Center is located northeast of the site and the December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-I 5 Spring Valley Manor Subdivision is located south of the site. Cooper Orbit Road borders the eastern boundary of the property. The roadway is a narrow unimproved roadway with deep ditches in several locations. Capitol Hills Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue have been cleared and are currently under construction and will be completed with Phase I to allow access to the site. Phase I of the development is also under construction with a majority of the site currently cleared. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received numerous informational phone calls from area residents. The Spring Valley Manor Neighborhood Association, the Gibraltar Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners Association, along with all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site, and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ANALYSIS: The current request is to stage street construction for Rushmore Avenue. When the site was originally reviewed by the Commission the site was a single tract and there was not a request for phasing of boundary street construction. The Planning Commission approved street completion concurrent with Phase 1. Sections 36-453 (a) and (d) of the zoning ordinance allow staging including streets and required adherence to the plan. The applicant did not contemplate nor request any such staging. In addition, submitted a grading plan to staff indicating development was imminent. The roadway has been cleared the roadway. Additional language in the ordinance requires final plan approval before the first building permit with the PD-R can be issued. This approval has already occurred. Creating lots through a revision to the PD-R is an option for the owner/developer, but does not preclude the conditions and plan established for the PD-R. Staff feels the road should be constructed as was originally approved and the deferral not be granted to allow the street construction with Lot 3 of the development. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-I 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. James Dreher and Mr. Bill Dean of Civil Design were present representing the request. There were three registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Staff stated the applicant had presented road construction with Phase I of the apartment development. Staff stated the changing of the proposed development from phasing lines to lot lines did not change the required street improvements. Staff stated phasing of street improvements was usually approved as a part of the initial request. Mr. Ross Phillips addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated the intent of the development was to construct the roads as a part of the original development and was approved in 1996. He stated the road was to be constructed to allow traffic to flow from the neighborhood and to cut-through from Colonel Glenn Road. He stated the applicant did not request the road to be phased with the apartments and he requested the Commission keep the proposed road as was previously approved. Ms. Anita Spence addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated her concern was with the traffic from the neighborhood meeting with the apartment traffic. She stated if Rushmore Avenue was not constructed then the traffic from the neighborhood and the traffic from the apartments would meet at the existing narrow two-lane bridge. She stated it was critical for Rushmore Avenue to be constructed with the existing phase of the apartments. Mr. Roger Lewis addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. Mr. Lewis stated the proposed road name was not consistent with the existing road name. He questioned why Rushmore Avenue was not being called Cooper Orbit Road. Staff stated Rushmore Avenue was a proposed collector street, which would turn to the west a point south of the apartments. Staff stated Cooper Orbit Road would then travel south following the existing alignment. Mr. James Dreher addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the request was to not construct Rushmore Avenue at the present time. He stated with the development of the area to the east of Rushmore Avenue and the proposed single- family development located to the south of the apartment development the construction of Rushmore was premature. He stated the proposed layout was not the most advantageous for development. He stated with the deferral of the street construction until a later phase of the apartment development the roadway location could be firmed up. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the proposed request, if the application should be an amendment to the PRD or the preliminary plat for the single-family development. There was also a discussion concerning the ability of Mr. Dean and Mr. Dreher to address the Commission on behalf of the owner. Staff stated they did not December 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-I 7 have an executed affidavit on file to allow these two men the ability to make binding decisions on behalf of the owner. Staff recommended the application be deferred to the January 29, 2004, Public Hearing to allow the applicant, Mr. Andy Francis to be present and/or allow the owner to submit all the necessary forms to allow Civil Design to act as the owner’s agent. A motion was made to defer the item to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 1 noe and 0 absent.