Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4411-A Staff AnalysisNovelh ITEM NO _ 29; 1994 ILE NO.: Z -4411-A NAME: PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE -- LONG -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: At the southeast corner of Cantrell Rd. and Pleasant Ridge Rd. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• LOU SCHICKEL WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2723 Foxcroft, Suite 201 401 S. Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72207 Little Rock, AR 72201 225-7807 374-1666 AREA: 12.83 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2, C-2, & PCD PROPOSED USES: Shopping Center and Offices PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENh9ES TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Approval of the Highway 10 landscape buffer being measured from the existing right-of-way line in lieu of from the new line of the right-of-way being dedicated with this application. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a PCD in order to develop a mixed use "neighborhood commercial" shopping center and an accompanying office development. The applicant explains that there is demand to meet the growing need for "high quality" neighborhood commercial development, properly buffered from the residential area with office development. The site is a 12.83 acre tract. Of this area, 11.48 acres is proposed to be developed as the shopping center. The proposed structure is 97,680 square feet, and 463 parking spaces are provided. The remaining.35 acre tract is to have 10,000 square feet of office buildi g located on it, and an additional 50 parking. -spaces will be provided. The developer proposes a maximum buildable area for the office development, and indicates that the development may involve construction of one or two building, with a maximum floor area of 10,000 square feet; a building "footprint" is not provided. The uses proposed for the shopping center are all uses by right in the C-2 and C-3 zoning districts, except that there are to be no service stations, auto glass or muffler shops, convenience stores, or car washes within the scope of the PCD. The uses proposed for the office use area are all uses by right in the 0-2 and 0-3 zoning district. The applicant states that the access to November'29, 1994 SIJBDIVISION ITEM No.: 9 Continued FILE NO.: Z 44I1 -A the shopping center area will be from Highway 10; that the existing E -Z Mart building is to be razed, and the primary access to the center will be taken at its former location at the existing traffic signal. The access to the office development will be taken from Pleasant Ridge Rd., an existing commercial street. Right-of-way for Highway 10 and for Fairview Rd. will be dedicated, as required, and Master Street Plan improvements will be made for Fairview Rd. An easement will be provided at the main entrance (at the E -Z Mart location) for installation of the traffic signal sensor. The required buffer along the Highway 10 frontage is 40 feet; it is proposed that, since no additional street improvements are required, this buffer width be measured from the existing right-of-way line in lieu of from the location of the right-of-way line when additional right-of-way is dedicated with this development. A. PROPOSAL RE VEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for the establishment of the PCD. A variance is requested to be approved for the required buffer along Highway 10 to be measured from the existing right-of-way line in lieu of from the :right-of-way line to be established by the dedication of additional right-of-way. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is primarily undeveloped and is partially wooded. Much of the western portion of the site is cleared. The site includes the location of the Present E -Z Mart at the Southridge Rd. intersection. The topogrraphy rises to the south, with the ground elevation rising, from an elevation of approximately 490 feet MSL (Mean Sea Level) along Highway 10 to over 550 feet MSL along the south boundary of the site. The existing zoning of the tract includes areas which are zoned R-2, C-1, and PCD. The existing E -Z Mart site is the location of the PCD zoning. The C-1 site lies along the Pleasant Ridge Rd. frontage. The zoning to the south and east, on the south side of Highway 10, is exclusively R-2. To the west are R-2 and 0-3 zoned areas. On the south side of Highway 10, between the site and Highway 10, are two sites, one zoned C-1, the other, PCD. Across Highway 10 to the north is R-2 land. C. ENGINEERIN ❑TILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comment that: 1) Cantrell Rd. requires dedication of additional right-of-way to bring one-half of street dedication to 55 feet; 2) Fairview Rd. will require dedication of additional right-of-way to provide one-half of a 50 foot right-of-way; 3) when the additional required 2 November^29, 1994 SUBDIVISIQN ITEM NO.: 9 Continued FILE NQ.: 4411-A right-of-way right-of-way is dedicated, or if the area at the E -Z Mart is to be dedicated to the City in order to install a traffic light sensor, proof of site mitigation for the underground fuel tanks will be required prior to dedication of the right-of-way; 4) Master Street Plan street improvements will be required on Fairview Road; 5) a sketch grading and drainage plan, meeting the requirements of Sec. 29-186, is required before construction, and A NPDES permit will be required; 6) the cut planned for the rear of the property will require terracing, according to the recommendations of Sec. 29-190 (every 10 feet of vertical cut requires a 10 foot terrace, with plantings.); 7) ditches will be required to intersect drainage on each of the terraces; 8) street plans, stormwater detention, and boundary survey information will be required; 9) a 60 foot by 100 foot dedication or easement will be required for the entrance drive off Cantrell Rd.; 10) the entrance drive will be required to be 36 feet wide; and 11) traffic signal modifications are the responsibility of the developer/owner. Water Works comments that on-site fire protection may be required. Wastewater comments that a sewer main extension, with easements, will be required. Arkansas Power and Light Co. comments that a 15 foot easement will be required along the exterior boundaries of the site. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. will require easements, as noted for the preliminary plat item. The Fire Department comments that numerous on-site fire hydrants will be required for this site. Landscape review reports that the areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet the Highway 10 Overlay Ordinance requirements, with the exception of two small areas along the eastern and southern site perimeters. In these instances, they fall short of the 25 foot width requirement by 13 feet to 17 feet. Trees will be required within the Hwy. 10 landscape buffer with an average spacing of 20 feet. A berm, wall, or dense evergreen plantings will be required to screen the vehicular use areas as viewed 42 inches above the adjacent elevation of Highway 10. A sprinkler system to water plants will be required. A 6 foot high opaque screen, either a good neighbor fence or dense evergreen plantings, will be required to screen this site K November -29, 1994 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. 9 (Continued-) FILE NO Z -4411=A from the residential properties to the south. A cross section showing the proposed method of handling the large slope must be defined. Because of the proposed large cut, the Public Works Dept. will require terracing to lessen the impact. Trees will be required to be planted within the terracing areas. Raised curbing, fencing, or other protection should be provided at the slope base to protect the vehicular use area from fallen rocks and erosion. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: - 1 . The Planning Staff comments that the request is in the River Mountain District, and the adopted Land Use Plan recommends that the area be developed as Single Family uses. The Planning staff adds that, at this time, staff can find no justification for amending the Plan from Single Family to Commercial in order to allow development of a community level shopping center. E. ANALYSIS: The applicant states that the shopping center is a "neighborhood commercial" development; the Planning staff interprets the proposed use to be a "community level shopping center". It is both in conflict with the Land Use Plan as a commercial use, and it cannot be justified as a neighborhood commercial development. Public Works has indicated that no widening of Highway 10 is required at this time, and the applicant has asked for a variance to permit the measurement of the required buffer width to be taken from the existing right-of-way, in lieu of from the location of the right-of-way line when the additional right-of-way is dedicated. If, in the future, Highway 10 is widened, the width of the landscape buffer will be lessened by the amount of improvements made. The technical requirements of the submittal have been met. The proposed number of parking spaces is in conformance with the regulations. The applicant has agreed to the requirements of staff for the cut area along the south boundary of the site. Requirement, however, for site lighting and signage need to be discussed and established. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the PCD because the proposal is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan, and because the commercial development is more community oriented instead of neighborhood oriented. 4 November'29, 1994 SUBDIVISION TTEM NO.: 9 Continued FILE NO.: 7-4411-A SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 10, 1994) Representatives of the applicant were present. Mr. Joe White, with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., the project engineering firm, reviewed with staff the comments contained in the discussion outline. There was discussion regarding the requested variance for the buffer along Highway 10, regarding the various Public Works comments, and regarding the various Neighborhoods and Planning staff comments. Mr. White responded that he would meet with the Public Works staff to come to an agreement on the needed modifications, and would provide the requested information as noted in the discussion outline. The Committee forwarded the PCD request to the full Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMZSSTON ACTION: (NOVEMBER 29, 1994) Chairperson Chachere stated that the discussion on Items 9, Pleasant Ridge Square -- Long -Form PCD (Z -4411-A) and Item 10, Coulson Oil, Highway 10 -- Short -Form PCD (Z -4411-B) would be conducted as one discussion item, but that each of the items would be voted on individually. Staff presented an overview of each of the two items. Staff pointed out to the Commission that both items required a variance from the Commission on the depth of the front landscape buffer being measured from the existing right -of --way line in lieu of from the right-of-way line when the additional right-of-way is dedicated. Mrs. Meredith Catlett, an attorney representing Mr. Lou Schickel, the applicant for Item 9, the Pleasant Ridge Square -- Long -Form PCD, spoke in support Mr. Schickel's application. Mrs. Catlett outlined the scope of the application, and stated that the proposed development consists of a neighborhood shopping center, plus an outparcel for a future office building. She told the Commission that the application is for a mixed use PCD application, and that, therefore, the issue raised regarding single -use PCD's is not applicable. Mrs. Catlett related that, as far back as 1980, the land use plan for the area had indicated that the site was appropriate for neighborhood shopping. She explained that "neighborhood shopping" centers are typically anchored by large super markets, have a maximum size of 100,000 square feet, and occupy a site of approximately 15 acres. She contended, then, that the proposed development fits into the "neighborhood shopping" category exactly, since the proposed development very nearly meets the definition requirements. She contested the staff comment that the shopping center constitutes a community -level shopping center, saying that the definition of a community -level shopping center states that such a center is anchored by two general merchandise stores, that such a center 9 Nove'mb&r , 2 9 , 1�9 9 4 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 Continued FILE NO.: Z -4411-A has a maximum size of 300,000 square feet, and that such a site has a maximum area of 50 acres. The proposed project, she concluded, does not fit the definition of the community -level shopping center, but does fit precisely into the definition of the neighborhood shopping center category. Mrs. Catlett added that, in 1986, the land use plan had been updated, and that the land on the south side of Highway 10 at the Southridge intersection had been designated as a commercial node. She said that the request was for a very limited expansion of the commercial node which already exists on the property. She explained that, in"1989, the Highway 10 overlay requirements were adopted, and that the proposed project meets the requirements of the overlay ordinance, as well. She stated that the developer, Mr. Schickel, lives in the area, and plans to own and manage the project for the long term. Mr. Schickel, she said, had met with and talked with numerous persons from the area, and had met with representatives of various land owners and property owners associations in the area. She reported that she was submitting a petition, signed by over 200 area land owners, who are in support of the project. Mr. Joe white, with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., the project engineering firm, presented the proposal. He pointed out that the existing E -Z Mart would be razed, and the entrance to the shopping center would be at the location of the present E -Z Mart store. This, he elaborated, would allow the new entrance to take advantage of the existing signalized intersection. He pointed out that the existing E -Z Mart has two access points, and that, when the E -Z Mart is removed and the new center is developed, the new center would have only two access point along the Highway 10 frontage. Thus, he explained, there would be no increase in access points on Highway 10. The shopping center and the Coulson Oil property to the east would, he indicated, share an internal driveway. He stated that the architecture of the proposed center was handsome, and that the architectural style would be carried over to the Coulson Oil development. Mr. David Jones, with Vogel Realty, representing Coulson Oil spoke in support of the Coulson Oil proposal. He stated that the agreement between Coulson Oil and Mr. Schickel requires that, when Coulson Oil is granted its building permit, the existing E -Z Mart, which Coulson Oil currently owns, will cease to exist, and that the number of convenience stores will remain at the same number as currently exists: the new Shell store at the eastern end of the block and the Phillips 66 store at the western end. He stated that the new Shell store will meet the Highway 10 overlay standards, whereas the E -Z Mart store does not. He stated that the Coulson Oil persons had gone "step by step" with Lou Schickel and his group to the neighborhood meetings and to other land owners in the area. The petition which has been presented by Ms. Catlett in support of the shopping center 0 Noveiaber '29, 1994 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.. 9 Continued FILE NO.: Z -4411-A development, he said, was also a document in support of the Coulson Oil development. Mr. Mike Coulson, with Coulson Oil, stated that, after the defeat of his proposal for the apposite side of Highway 10, he had heeded the neighborhood's concerns regarding location and being a "part of the neighborhood". He said that there would be no net increase in the number of convenience stores and gas service stations on the property; that the E -Z Mart store would be closed. He said that the architectural style of the new Shell store would be consistent with the shopping center's architectural style. Mr. Robert Brown, with Development Consultants, Inc., the project engineering firm, described the site development scheme, and stated that, although the Coulson oil site is being developed on a separate lot in the subdivision, it is an integral part of the overall Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center site. He said that the internal traffic circulation system was integrated with the shopping center site, as is the architectural style of the buildings and landscaping. He described the various uses which had been requested in the application. He stated that, counting the green space measured from the existing right-of-way line, site landscaping and green space are close to 50e of the ground space of the site. He reiterated that the site plan which has been presented has the 40 foot minimum green space along Highway 10 measured from the existing right--of-way line, in lieu of from the right-of-way line after dedication of additional right-of- way. He explained, though, that there are no plans to widen Highway 10; that curb -to -curb on Highway 10 is a minimum of 50 feet at the present time, and he requested approval by the Commission of this proposal. He explained that Woodland Road, the boundary street to the east, is very steep as it extends southward from Highway 10, and that it was necessary to place the access point to Woodland Rd. closer to Highway 10 than the ordinance standard of 100 feet. He explained that the proposed access point to Woodland Rd. is approximately 70 feet off Highway 10, and requested approval of this location. He went on to say that there is adequate frontage on Highway 10 for a third access point onto Highway 10 from the development, with Woodland Rd. being a forth access point for traffic onto Highway 10, but that the two developers had limited the number of access points on Highway 10 to two, plus Woodland Rd., in lieu of three plus Woodland Rd. Mr. Mark D'Auteuil, who identified himself as president of the Pleasant Forrest Property Owners' Association, stated that the Pleasant Forest neighborhood opposes rezoning of the property for commercial uses, explaining that traffic would increase through the neighborhood as a result. He said that the Association opposes any extension of commercial rezonings into the neighborhood. 7 November,29, 1994 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 Continued FILE Mr. Donald Glowen, who identified himself as a resident of Candlewood and representing the Walton Heights Neighborhood Association, affirmed that, at the neighborhood meeting with the developers, the group from, the neighborhood who had attended were in support of the proposed development, but that the neighborhood still has concerns regarding land use along Highway 10. He asked that a decision on the proposed rezoning be deferred until further study of land use issues could be conducted. Ms. Ruth Bell, rep'tesenting the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County, expressed opposition to rezoning unless there is clear and compelling reason for doing so. She contended that the shopping center, although meeting the definition standards for a neighborhood commercial center■ is going to be drawing traffic from a larger area than "the neighborhood", and is more than a neighborhood center. she expressed concerns regarding the likely increase of traffic which will be generated thorough the neighborhoods to the south, and she expressed concern that the buildings be visually attractive and blend in with the surroundings. Mr. Bill Mauldin, who identified himself as a long-time resident of Walton Heights, said that, at the neighborhood meeting at which the developers, plans had been presented, there were approximately 30 residents represented, but that he did not feel that the positive reaction to the proposal represented the majority of the neighborhood. He said that the neighborhood association was concerned that residents were unaware of the scope of the proposed project. He reiterated a request that the decision on the rezoning be deferred until the neighborhood has time to meet with City staff, Commission members, and the developers to study the request further. Mr. Ernie Peters, a traffic consultant for the developers, spoke, and explained that the great majority of traffic coming to the development from the south would be generated by persons from the neighborhoods to the south, and would not be traffic of persons driving through the neighborhoods from beyond these neighborhoods. He said that the signal light at the Southridge Dr. intersection will be improved, and that the developer will pay the costs of modifying it to be a four-way signal. Steve Giles, deputy City Attorney, stated that the Schickel development seems to meet the ordinance definition, for a shopping center, therefore, would meet the criteria for approval as a PCD. The Coulson development, he said, since not having the mixture of uses which are required by the ordinance, would have to meet the definition requirements for a shopping center in order for it to be approved as a PCD. 8 November •29, 1994 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z -4411-A Mr. David Jones stated that the Coulson site is a mixed use commercial development, and, as such, meets the ordinance standard to be classified as a shopping center. He said that he felt that the Coulson proposal could be approved as a PCD. He added, though, that the proposed ordinance changes to permit single -use PCD's would clarify the situation. Mr. Tim Polk, Acting Director of Neighborhoods and Planning, related that the concern of the City and residents along Highway 10 is that there be a land use plan which promotes retention of the scenic beauty `of Highway 10 and does not permit the stripping -out of the corridor. He conceded that the existing residential zoning of the site is inappropriate, but stated that commercial development is also inappropriate. He recommended that a appropriate land use of the site is a mixed office and multi -family development. The proposed development, he said, is too intense, and said that the trade area is too large for classification as a neighborhood shopping center. He expressed concern regarding the increased traffic along Highway 10 and in the abutting neighborhoods. He stated that approval of the PCDIs would necessitate a major land use plan amendment approval by the Board of Directors. Commissioner Ball raised the question of whether one PCD could be built without the other; whether the Coulson Oil PCD could be built without the shopping center PCD being started or built. Commissioner Walker stated that it would be a catastrophe if the Coulson Oil site were developed and the shopping center were not; that the two developments need to be paired as a unified development. Mr. Schickel stated that, when the Coulson Oil development is constructed and opened, the E -Z Mart store would cease to operate as a convenience store or gas service station, but that the building would remain until it is torn down as part of the shopping center construction. He stated that the time frame for construction of the shopping center is dependent on getting a lessee for the grocery store, but that he felt that construction would begin within a year. Mr. Jones stated that Mr. Coulson had related to him that he would amend the Coulson Oil PCD application to place the condition on it that construction of the Coulson Oil PCD would begin only in conjunction with the shopping center construction; that the Coulson Oil PCD would not be built until and at a different time than the shopping center is built. A motion was made and seconded to Pleasant Ridge Square PCD and an which will reflect the commercial motion carried with the vote of 9 0 abstentions. recommend approval of the amendment of the Land Use Plan use of the property. The ayes, 1 nays, 1 absent, and NoveIftber 29, 1994 ❑BDIUMN _._.w«.. A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the Coulson oil, Highway 10 PCD, to recommend approval of an amendment of the Land Use Plan which will reflect the commercial use of the property, and to recommend approval of the street access variance for the driveway location on Woodland Rd.. The motion carried with the vote of g ayes, 2 nays, 1 absent, and 0 abstentions. I 10 FILE NO.: Z -4411-A NAME: PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE -- LONG -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: At the southeast corner of Cantrell Rd. and Pleasant Ridge Rd. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: LOU SCHICKEL WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2723 Foxcroft, Suite 201 401 S. Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72207 Little Rock, AR 72201 225-7807 374-1666 AREA: 12.83 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2, C-2, & PCD PROPOSED USES: Shopping Center and Offices PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES RE UESTED Approval of the Highway 10 landscape buffer being measured from the existing right-of-way line in lieu of from the new line of the right-of-way being -dedicated with this application. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a PCD in order to develop a mixed use "neighborhood commercial" shopping center and an accompanying office development. The applicant explains that there is demand to meet the growing need for "high quality" neighborhood commercial development, properly buffered from the residential area with office development. The site is a 12.83 acre tract. Of this area, 11.48 acres is proposed to,be developed as the shopping center. The proposed structure is 97,680 square feet, and 463 parking spaces are provided. The remaining 1.35 acre tract is to have 10,000 square feet of office building located on it, and an additional 50 parking spaces will be provided. The developer proposes a maximum buildable area for the office development, and indicates that the development may involve construction of one or two building, with a maximum floor area of 10,000 square feet; a building "footprint" is not provided. The uses proposed for the shopping center are all uses by right in the C-2 and C-3 zoning districts, except that there are to be no service stations, auto glass or muffler shops, convenience stores, or car washes within the scope of the PCD. The uses proposed for the office use area are all uses by right in the 0-2 and 0-3 zoning district. The applicant states that the access to FILE NO.: Z -4411-A Continued the shopping center area will be from Highway 10; that the existing E -Z Mart building is to be razed, and the primary access to the center will be taken at its former location at the existing traffic signal. The access to the office development will be taken from Pleasant Ridge Rd., an existing commercial street. Right-of-way for Highway 10 and for Fairview Rd. will be dedicated, as required, and Master Street Plan improvements. will be made for Fairview Rd. An easement will be provided at the main entrance (at the E -Z Mart location) for installation of the traffic signal sensor. The required buffer along the Highway 10 frontage is 40 feet; it. is proposed that, since no additional street improvements are required, this buffer width be measured from the existing right-of-way line in lieu of from -the location of the right-of-way line when additional right-of-way is dedicated with this development. A. PROPOSAWREOUEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for the establishment of the PCD. A variance is requested to be approved for the required buffer along Highway 10 to be measured from the existing right-of-way line in 'lieu of from the right-of-way line to be established by the dedication of additional right-of-way. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is primarily undeveloped and is partially wooded-. Much of the western portion of the site is cleared. The site includes the location of the present E -Z Mart at the Southridge Rd. intersection. The topography rises to the south, wi-th the ground elevation rising from an elevation of approximately 490 feet MSL (Mean Sea Level) along Highway 10 to over 550 feet MSL along the south boundary of the site. The existing zoning of the tract includes areas which are zoned R-2, C-1, and PCD. The existing E -Z Mart site is the location of the PCD zoning. The C-1 site lies along the Pleasant Ridge Rd. frontage. The zoning to the south and east, on the south side of Highway 10, is exclusively R-2. To the west are R-2 and 0-3 zoned areas. On the south side of Highway 10, between the site and Highway 10, are two sites, one zoned C-1, the other, PCD. Across Highway 10 to the north is R-2 land. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comment that: 1) Cantrell Rd. requires dedication of additional right-of-way to bring one-half of street dedication to 55 feet; 2') Fairview Rd. will require dedication of additional right-of-way to provide one-half of a 50 foot right-of-way; 3) when the additional required right-of-way is dedicated, or if the area at the E -Z Mart is to be dedicated to the City in order to install a traffic 2 FILE NO.: Z -4411-A (Continued) light sensor, proof of site mitigation for the underground fuel tanks will be required prior to dedication of the right-of-way; 4) Master Street Plan street improvements will be required on Fairview Road; 5) a sketch grading and drainage plan, meeting the requirements of Sec. 29-186, is required before construction, and A NPDES permit will be required; 6) the cut planned for the rear of the property will require terracing, according to the recommendations of Sec. 29-190 (Every 10 feet of vertical cut requires a 10 foot terrace, with plantings.); 7) ditches will be required to intersect drainage on each of the terraces; 8) street plans, stormwater detention,,and boundary survey information will be required; 9) a 60 foot by 100 foot dedication or easement will be required for the entrance drive off Cantrell Rd.; 10) the entrance drive will be required to be 36 feet wide; and 11) traffic signal modifications are the responsibility of the developer/owner. Water Works comments that on-site fire protection may be required. Wastewater comments that a sewer main extension, with easements, will be required. Arkansas Power and Light Co. comments that a 15 foot easement will be required along the exterior boundaries of the site. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. will require easements, as noted for the preliminary plat item. The Fire Department comments that numerous on -site -fire hydrants will be required for this site. Landscape review reports that the areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet the Highway 10 Overlay Ordinance requirements, with the exception of two small areas along the eastern and southern site perimeters. In these instances, they fall short of the 25 foot width requirement by 13 feet to 17 feet. Trees will be required within the Hwy. 10 landscape buffer with an average spacing of 20 feet. A berm, wall, or dense evergreen plantings will be required to screen the vehicular use areas as viewed 42 inches above the adjacent elevation of Highway 10. A sprinkler system to water plants will be required. A 6 foot high opaque screen, either a good neighbor fence or dense evergreen plantings, will be required to screen this site from the residential properties to the south. A cross section showing the proposed method of handling the large slope must be defined. Because of the proposed large cut, the Public Works Dept. will require terracing to lessen the 3 FILE NO.: Z -4411-A Continued impact. Trees will be required to be planted within the terracing areas. Raised curbing, fencing, or other protection should be provided at the slope base to protect the vehicular use area from fallen rocks and erosion. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: The Planning Staff comments that the request is in the River Mountain District, and the adopted Land Use Plan recommends that the area be developed as Single Family uses. The Planning 'staff adds that, at this time, staff can find no justification for amending the Plan from Single Family to Commercial in order to allow development of a community level shopping center. E. ANALYSIS: The applicant states that the'shopping center is a "neighborhood commercial" development; the Planning staff interprets the proposed use to be a "community level shopping center". It is both in conflict with the Land Use Plan as a commercial use, and it cannot be justified as a neighborhood commercial development. Public Works has indicated that no widening of Highway 10 is required at this time, and the applicant has asked for a variance to permit the measurement of the required buffer width to be taken from the existing right-of-way, in lieu of from the location of the right-of=way line when.the additional right-of-way is dedicated. if, -in the future, Highway 10 is widened, the width of the landscape buffer will be lessened by the amount of improvements made. The technical requirements of the submittal have been met. The proposed number of parking spaces is in conformance with the regulations. The applicant has agreed to the requirements of staff for the•cut area along the ---south boundary of the site. Requirement, however, for site lighting and signage need to be discussed and established. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the PCD because the proposal is not in conformance with the Land Use Plan, and because the commercial development is more community oriented instead of neighborhood oriented. BDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 10, 1994) Representatives of the applicant were present. Mr. Joe White, with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., the project engineering firm, reviewed with staff the comments contained in the discussion outline. There was discussion regarding the requested 4 FILE NO.: Z -4411-A Continued variance for the buffer along Highway 10, regarding the various Public Works comments, and regarding the various Neighborhoods and Planning staff comments. Mr. White responded that he would meet with the Public Works staff to come to an agreement on the needed modifications, and would provide the requested information as noted in the discussion outline. The Committee forwarded the PCD request to the full Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 29, 1994) - Chairperson Chachere stated that the discussion on Items 91 Pleasant Ridge Square--- Long -Form PCD (Z -4411-A) and Item 10, Coulson Oil, Highway 10 -= Short -Form PCD (Z-4411-8) would be conducted as one discussion item, but that -each of the items would be voted on individually. - Staff presented an overview of each of the two items. --Staff pointed out to the Commission that both items required a variance from the Commission on the depth of the front landscape buffer being measured from the existing right -of --way line in lieu of from the -right-of -way line when the additional right-of-way is dedicated. _ Mrs.'Meredith Catlett, an attorney representing Mr. Lou Schickel, the applicant for Item 9, the Pleasant Ridge Square -- Long -Form PCD, spoke in support Mr. Schickei's application. Mrs. Catlett outlined the scope of the application, and stated that the proposed development consists of a neighborhood shopping center, plus an outparcel for a future office building: She told the Commission that the application is for a mixed use PCD application, and that, therefore, the issue raised regarding single -use PCD's is not applicable. Mrs_ Catlett related that, as far back as 1980; the land use plan for the area had indicated that the site was appropriate for neighborhood shopping. She explained that "neighborhood shopping" centers are typically anchored by large super-markets,,have a maximum size of 100,000 square feet, and occupy a site of approximately 15 acres. She contended, then, that the proposed development fits into the "neighborhood shopping" category exactly, since the proposed development very nearly meets the definition requirements. She contested the staff comment that the shopping center constitutes a community -level shopping center, saying that the definition of a community -level shopping center states that such a center is anchored by two general merchandise stores, that such a center has a maximum size of 300,000 square feet, and that such a site has a maximum area of 50 acres. The proposed project, she concluded, does not fit the definition of the community -level shopping center, but does fit precisely into the definition of the neighborhood shopping center category. Mrs. Catlett added that, in 1986, the land use.plan had been updated, and that the land on the south side of Highway 10 at the Southridge intersection had been designated as a commercial node. She said that the request was for a very limited expansion of the 5 FILE NO.: Z. -4411-A (Continued commercial node which already exists on the property. She explained that, in 1989, the Highway 10 overlay requirements were adopted, and that the proposed project meets the requirements of the overlay ordinance, as well. She stated that the developer, Mr. Schickel, lives in the area, and plans to own and manage the project for the long term. Mr. Schickel, she said, had met with and talked with numerous persons from the area, and had met with representatives of various land owners and property owners associations in the area. She reported that she was submitting a petition, signed by over 200 area land owners, who are in support of the project. Mr. Joe white, with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., the project engineering firm, presented the proposal. He pointed out that the existing E -Z Mart would be'razed, and the entrance to the shopping center would be at the location of the present E -Z Mart store. This, he elaborated, would allow the new entrance to take advantage of the -existing signalized intersection. He pointed out that the existing E -Z Mart has two access points, and that, when the E -Z Mart is removed and the new center is developed, the new center would have only two access point along -the Highway 10 frontage. Thus, he explained, there would be no increase in access points on Highway 10: The shopping center and the Coulson Oil property to the east would, he indicated, share an internal driveway. He stated that the architecture of the proposed center was handsome, and that the architectural style would be carried over to the Coulson Oil development. Mr. -David Jones, with Vogel Realty, representing -Coulson Oil spoke in support of the Coulson Oil proposal'. -He stated that the agreement between Coulson Oil and Mr. Schickel requires --that, when Coulson Oil is granted its building permit, the existing E -Z Mart, which Coulson Oil currently owns, will cease to exist, and that the number of convenience stores will remain at the same number as currently exists: the new Shell store at the eastern end of the block and the Phillips 66 store at the western end. He stated that the new Shell store will meet the Highway 10 overlay standards, whereas the E -Z Mart store does not. He stated that the Coulson Oil persons had gone "step by step" with Lou Schickel and his group to the neighborhood meetings and to other land owners in the area. The petition which has been presented by Ms. Catlett in support of the shopping center development, he said, was also a document in support of the Coulson Oil development. Mr. Mike Coulson, with Coulson Oil, stated that, after the defeat of his proposal for the opposite side of Highway 10, he had heeded the neighborhood's concerns regarding location and being a "part of the neighborhood". He said that there would be no net increase in the number of convenience stores and gas service stations on the property; that the E -Z Mart store would be closed. He said that the architectural style of the new Shell store would be consistent with the shopping center's architectural style. FILE NO.: Z -4411-A (Continued) Mr. Robert Brown, with Development Consultants, Inc., the project engineering firm, described the site development scheme, and stated that, although the Coulson Oil site is being developed on a separate lot in the subdivision, it is an integral part of the overall Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center site. He said that the internal traffic circulation system was integrated with the shopping center site, as is the architectural style of the buildings and landscaping. He described the various uses which had been requested in the application. He stated that, counting the green space measured from the existing right-of-way line, site landscaping and green space are close to 50% of the ground space of the site. He reiterated that the site plan which has been presented has the 40 foot minimum green space along Highway 10 measured from the existing right-of-way line; in lieu of from the right-of-way line after- dedication of additional right-of- way. He explained,' though, that there -are no plans to widen Highway 10; that curb -to -curb on Highway 10 is a minimum of 50 feet at the present time, and he requested approval by the Commission of this proposal. He explained that Woodland Road, the boundary street to the east, is very steep as it extends southward from Highway 10, and that it was necessary to place the access point to Woodland Rd. closer to Highway 10 than the ordinance standard of 100- feet. He explained -that the proposed access point to -Woodland Rd. is. approximately 70 feet off -Highway 10, and requested approval of this location. He went on to say that there is adequate frontage on Highway 10 for a third access point onto Highway 10„from the development,�with-Woodland Rd. being a forth access point for traffic onto Highway 10, but that the two developers had limited the number of' -access points on Highway 10 to two, plus Woodland Rd., in lieu of three plus woodland Rd. Mr. Mark D'Auteuil, who identified himself as president of the Pleasant Forrest Property Owners' Association, stated that the Pleasant Forest neighborhood opposes rezoning of the property for commercial uses, explaining that traffic would increase through the neighborhood as a result. He said that the Association opposes any extension of commercial rezon.ings into the neighborhood. Mr. Donald Glowen, who identified himself as a resident of Candlewood and representing the Walton Heights Neighborhood Association, affirmed that, at the neighborhood meeting with the developers, the group from the neighborhood who had attended were in support of the proposed development, but that the neighborhood still has concerns regarding land use along Highway 10. He asked that a decision on the proposed rezoning be deferred until further study of land use issues could be conducted. Ms. Ruth Bell, representing the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County, expressed opposition to rezoning unless there is clear and compelling reason for doing so. She contended that the shopping center, although meeting the definition standards for a 7 FILE NO.: Z -4411-A (Continued) neighborhood commercial center, is going to be drawing traffic from a larger area than "the neighborhood", and is more than a neighborhood center. She expressed concerns regarding the likely increase of traffic which will be generated thorough the neighborhoods to the south, and she expressed concern that the buildings be visually attractive and blend in with the surroundings. Mr. Bill Mauldin, who identified himself as a long-time resident of Walton Heights, said that, at the neighborhood meeting at which the developers' plans had been presented, there were approximately 30 residents represented, but that he did not feel that the positive reaction to the proposal represented the majority of the neighborhood. He said that the neighborhood association was concerned that residents were unaware of the scope of the proposed project. He reiterated a request that the decision on the rezoning be deferred until the neighborhood has time to meet with City staff, Commission members, and the developers to study the request further. Mr. Ernie Peters, a traffic consultant for the developers, spoke, and explained that the great majority of traffic coming to the development from the south would be generated by persons from the neighborhoods to the south, and would not be traffic of persons driving through the neighborhoods from beyond these neighborhoods. He said that the signal light at the Southridge Dr. intersection will be improved.. and that the developer will pay the costs -of modifying it to be a four-way signal. Steve Giles, deputy City Attorney, stated that the Schickel development seems to meet the ordinance definition for a shopping center, therefore, would meet the criteria for approval as a PCD. The Coulson development, he said, since not having the mixture of uses which are required by the ordinance, would have to meet the definition requirements for a shopping center in order for it to be approved as a PCD. Mr. David Jones stated that the Coulson site is a mixed use commercial development, and, as such, meets the ordinance standard to be classified as a shopping center. He said that he felt that the Coulson proposal could be approved as a PCD. He added, though, that the proposed ordinance changes to permit single -use PCD's would clarify the situation. Mr. Tim Polk, Acting Director of Neighborhoods and Planning, related that the concern of the City and residents along Highway 10 is that there be a land use plan which promotes retention of the scenic beauty of Highway 10 and does not permit the stripping -out of the corridor. He conceded that the existing residential zoning of the site is inappropriate, but stated that commercial development is also inappropriate. He recommended that a appropriate land use of the site is a mixed office and multi -family development. The proposed development, he said, is too intense, and said that the trade area is too large for 0 FILE NO.: Z -4411-A Continued classification as a neighborhood shopping center. He expressed concern regarding the increased traffic along Highway 10 and in the abutting neighborhoods. He stated that approval of the PCD's would necessitate a major land use plan amendment approval by the Board of Directors. Commissioner Ball raised the question of whether one PCD could be built without the other; whether the Coulson Oil PCD could be built without the shopping center PCD being started or built. Commissioner Walker stated that it would be a catastrophe if the Coulson Oil site were developed and the shopping center were not; that the two developments need to be paired as a unified development. Mr. Schickel stated that, when the Coulson Oil development is constructed and opened, the E -Z Mart store would cease to operate. as a convenience store or gas service station, but that the building would remain until it is torn down as part of the shopping center construction. He stated that the time frame for construction of the shopping center is dependent on getting a lessee for the grocery store, but that he felt that construction would begin within a year. Mr. Jones stated that Mr. Coulson had related to him that he would amend the Coulson Oil PCD application to place the condition on it that construction of the Coulson Oil PCD would begin only in conjunction with the shopping center construction; that the Coulson Oil PCD would not be built until and at a different time than the shopping center is built. A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the Pleasant Ridge Square PCD and an amendment of the Land Use Plan which will reflect the commercial use of the property. The motion carried with the vote of 9 ayes, 1 nays, 1 absent, and 0 abstentions. A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the Coulson Oil, Highway 10 PCD, to recommend approval of an amendment of the Land Use Plan which will reflect the commercial use of the property, and to recommend approval of the street access variance for the driveway location on Woodland Rd.. The motion carried with the vote of 8 ayes, 2 nays, 1 absent, and 0 abstentions. 9