Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4807-E Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -4807-E Owner: Applicant: Location: Area: Request: Purpose: Existing Use: SURROUNDING LAND Shackleford Family Trust White-Daters and Associates Along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway Approximately 120 acres Rezoning from Various Districts to MF -18, 0-2, 0-3 and C-3 Future development Undeveloped E AND ZONING North — Apartment complex and undeveloped property; zoned MF -18, 0-3 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, NIF-18 and POD West — Single family residential, auto repair garage, office uses and undeveloped property (across Kirk Road); zoned 0-2, 0-3 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. FILE NO.: Z-4807-E(Cont.) 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 0-2 Office and Institutional, 0-3 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, 0-2, 0-3 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, 0-3 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 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 2 FILE NO.: Z -4807-E Cont. 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, 0-2, 0-3 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 0-2 to MF -18 (4.5 Acres) Area 5. Rezone from MF -18 to 0-2 (8.3 Acres) Area 6. Rezone from 0-2 to 0-3 (5 Acres) Area 7. Rezone from 0-2 to C-3 (4.3 Acres) Area 8. Rezone from 0-2 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 0-2 (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 0-2 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 0-2 (instead of 0-3) and maintained as part of the overall 0-2 tract to the east. Staff does not feel that small 0-3 zoned tracts will be appropriate for this area along the east side of Kirk Road (see Item 6. — proposed preliminary plat). 3 FILE NO.: Z -4807-E Cont. 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 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. 4 FILE NO.: Z -4807-E (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 29, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant submitted a letter requesting the item be deferred to the March 11, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 11, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter dated March 1, 2004 requesting the item be deferred to the April 22, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the By -Laws related to the number of allowed deferrals. Staff stated the applicant had notified property owners as required by the Planning Commission By -Laws of the deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the By -Law waiver and the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised zoning plan to staff on April 7, 2004. The revised plan makes two (2) minor changes to the original proposal. The applicant has removed the 5 acres of proposed 0-3 zoning along the east side of Kirk Road from the proposal. The applicant has also slightly enlarged the overall amount of proposed C-3 zoning along Systems Drive, from 4.3 acres to 5.8 acres. Otherwise, the rezoning plan remains the same, with approximately 46.5 acres of proposed MF -18 zoning along the east side of Chaplin Drive, approximately 28.5 acres of existing and proposed MF -18 zoning along the west side of Chaplin Drive, and approximately 26.3 acres of existing and proposed 0-2 zoning within the southern portion of the overall ownership. The attached sketch map shows the areas of existing and proposed zoning with reference to the proposed lots and street construction. Please disregard the previously used "Area" numbers, as they do not apply to the revised zoning plan and sketch. 5 FILE NO.: Z -4807-E (Cont.) Staff continues to be in support of an overall development/zoning plan for this 120 areas. Staff supports the zoning for lots 5, 6, 7, 12 and 13. Staff does not support the zoning proposed for Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Staff feels that MF -18 zoning along the east side of Chaplin Drive is too much density adjacent to the single family zoning to the east. Staff could support MF -6 zoning for Lots and 4, as they are adjacent to existing multifamily zoned areas. Staff would like to see Lots 2 and 3 zoned R-2 and incorporated into the single family development to the east. Additionally, staff continues to feel that it would be more appropriate to zone Lots 8-11 to "C-1" Neighborhood Commercial District (instead of C-3). Staff feels that C-1 zoning would be more compatible with the overall zoning plan for the area, given the total amount of multifamily zoning. Staff feels that the overall zoning plan for the property, as suggested by staff, is most appropriate for the property and surrounding properties. Staff believes that rezoning the property, as proposed by staff, will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties or the general area. Staff continues to recommend denial of the rezoning plan, as requested and revised by the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004) Wingfield Martin, Joe White and Scott Shackleford were present, representing the application. There were several persons present in opposition. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the overall zoning plan as requested by the applicant. The rezoning, land use plan amendment and preliminary plat were discussed simultaneously. Wingfield Martin addressed the Commission in support of the application. He gave a brief history of the property. He discussed the existing zoning in the area. He presented photos of developments in the area and discussed. He stated that he would amend the application to MF -12 zoning for Lots 1-4 and C-1 for Lots 8-11. He stated that he would also amend the Land Use Plan Amendment for Lots 8-11 to Neighborhood Commercial. Casey Tucker addressed the Commission in opposition. She expressed concerns with property values and increased crime rates associated with multifamily property. She discussed the existing multifamily zoned property in the area. Doug McNeil also addressed the Commission in opposition. He noted that he purchased the property to the east based on the fact that the property to the west was low density residential. He agreed with the master zoning plan for the property as recommended by staff. n FILE NO.: Z -4807-E (Cont. Dwayne Shelton also spoke in opposition. He expressed concern with the total amount of multifamily zoning proposed. He also expressed concerns with traffic in the area. He questioned the need for additional multifamily zoning in the area. Bob Tyler also spoke in opposition. He expressed a need for transition from Champlin Drive to the single family property to the east. He agreed with staff's recommendation. Alan Van Biervliet also addressed the Commission in opposition. He noted that the elevation of the property was higher than other'properties in the area. He expressed concerns with what development of the property would look like. Wingfield Martin stated that plan for the property had been known for several months. He noted that there was no intent to mislead any of the property owners in the area. There was a brief discussion of the staff recommendation. There was also discussion of the required vote. Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, stated that one (1) vote needed to be taken on the entire rezoning application. There was a motion to approve the Land Use Plan Amendment as revised by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 10 nays and 1 absent. Wingfield Martin further amended the rezoning application as recommended by staff. He requested MF -6 zoning for Lots 1 and 4, and R-2 zoning for Lots 2 and 3. There was a motion to approve the rezoning application as amended by the applicant and recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The revised application was approved. 7 April 22, 2004 ITEM NO.: A.3 Owner: Applicant: Location: Area: Request: Purpose: Existing Use: FILE NO.: Z -4807-E Shackleford Family Trust White-Daters and Associates Along the east side of Kirk Road, north of Chenal Parkway Approximately 120 acres Rezoning from Various Districts to MF -18, 0-2, 0-3 and C-3 Future development Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North — Apartment complex and undeveloped property; zoned MF -18, 0-3 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 0-2, 0-3 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. April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4807-E 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 0-2 Office and Institutional, 0-3 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, 0-2, 0-3 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, 0-3 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 4 April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4807-E 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, 0-2, 0-3 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 0-2 to MF -18 (4.5 Acres) Area 5. Rezone from MF -18 to 0-2 (8.3 Acres) Area 6. Rezone from 0-2 to 0-3 (5 Acres) Area 7. Rezone from 0-2 to C-3 (4.3 Acres) Area 8. Rezone from 0-2 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 0-2 (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 0-2 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 0-2 4 April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807-E (instead of 0-3) and maintained as part of the overall 0-2 tract to the east. Staff does not feel that small 0-3 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 2 April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4807-E 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 29, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant submitted a letter requesting the item be deferred to the March 11, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 11, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter dated March 1, 2004 requesting the item be deferred to the April 22, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the By -Laws related to the number of allowed deferrals. Staff stated the applicant had notified property owners as required by the Planning Commission By -Laws of the deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the By -Law waiver and the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised zoning plan to staff on April 7, 2004. The revised plan makes two (2) minor changes to the original proposal. The applicant has removed the 5 acres of proposed 0-3 zoning along the east side of Kirk Road from the proposal. The applicant has also slightly enlarged the overall 5 April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807-E amount of proposed C-3 zoning along Systems Drive, from 4.3 acres to 5.8 acres. Otherwise, the rezoning plan remains the same, with approximately 46.5 acres of proposed MF -18 zoning along the east side of Chaplin Drive, approximately 28.5 acres of existing and proposed MF -18 zoning along the west side of Chaplin Drive, and approximately 26.3 acres of existing and proposed 0-2 zoning within the southern portion of the overall ownership. The attached sketch map shows the areas of existing and proposed zoning with reference to the proposed lots and street construction. Please disregard the previously used "Area" numbers, as they do not apply to the revised zoning plan and sketch. Staff continues to be in support of an overall development/zoning plan for this 120 areas. Staff supports the zoning for lots 5, 6, 7, 12 and 13. Staff does not support the zoning proposed for Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Staff feels that MF -18 zoning along the east side of Chaplin Drive is too much density adjacent to the single family zoning to the east. Staff could support MF -6 zoning for Lots and 4, as they are adjacent to existing multifamily zoned areas. Staff would like to see Lots 2 and 3 zoned R-2 and incorporated into the single family development to the east. Additionally, staff continues to feel that it would be more appropriate to zone Lots 8-11 to "C-1" Neighborhood Commercial District (instead of C-3). Staff feels that C-1 zoning would be more compatible with the overall zoning plan for the area, given the total amount of multifamily zoning. Staff feels that the overall zoning plan for the property, as suggested by staff, is most appropriate for the property and surrounding properties. Staff believes that rezoning the property, as proposed by staff, will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties or the general area. Staff continues to recommend denial of the rezoning plan, as requested and revised by the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004) Wingfield Martin, Joe White and Scott Shackleford were present, representing the application. There were several persons present in opposition. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the overall zoning plan as requested by the applicant. The rezoning, land use plan amendment and preliminary plat were discussed simultaneously. - Wingfield Martin addressed the Commission in support of the application. He gave a brief history of the property. He discussed -the existing zoning in the area. A April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4807-E He presented photos of developments in the area and discussed. He stated that he would amend the application to MF -12 zoning for Lots 1-4 and C-1 for Lots 8-11. He stated that he would also amend the Land Use Plan Amendment for Lots 8-11 to Neighborhood Commercial. Casey Tucker addressed the Commission in opposition. She expressed concerns with property values and increased crime rates associated with multifamily property. She discussed the existing multifamily zoned property in the area. Doug McNeil also addressed the Commission in opposition. He noted that he purchased the property to the east based on the fact that the property to the west was low density residential. He agreed with the master zoning plan for the property as recommended by staff. Dwayne Shelton also spoke in opposition. He expressed concern with the total amount of multifamily zoning proposed. He also expressed concerns with traffic in the area. He questioned the need for additional multifamily zoning in the area. Bob Tyler also spoke in opposition. He expressed a need for transition from Champlin Drive to the single family property to the east. He agreed with staff's recommendation. Alan Van Biervliet also addressed the Commission in opposition. He noted that the elevation of the property was higher than other properties in the area. He expressed concerns with what development of the property would look like. Wingfield Martin stated that plan for the property had been known for several months. He noted that there was no intent to mislead any of the property owners in the area. There was a brief discussion of the staff recommendation. There was also discussion of the required vote. Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, stated that one (1) vote needed to be taken on the entire rezoning application. There was a motion to approve the Land Use Plan Amendment as revised by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 10 nays and 1 absent. Wingfield Martin further amended the rezoning application as recommended by staff. He requested MF -6 zoning for Lots 1 and 4, and R-2 zoning for Lots 2 and 3. iFA April 22, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A.3 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4807-E There was a motion to approve the rezoning application as amended by the applicant and recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The revised application was approved. May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N FILE NO.: Z -4807-F NAME: Shackleford Farms Long -form POD LOCATION: Located North of Wellington Hills Road, West of the Villages of Wellington Subdivision DEVELOPER: Whisenhunt Investment 35 Windsor Court Little Rock, AR 72212 FN(;INFFR- Development Consultant, Inc. 2200 North Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 10.08 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 R-2, MF -6, 0-2 and C-1 FT, NEW STREET: 0 LF Single-family, Multi -family, Office and Commercial -•D PROPOSED USE: 0-2 and C-2 - Mix of 70% Office and 30% Commercial Uses VARIANCESIWAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the rezoning of this site from various zoning classifications to POD (Planned Office Development) to provide a conceptual plan to establish uses for the property. The applicant has indicated as a development plan or plans are secured the POD will be revised to allow review by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors for compliance with established criteria. The applicant has indicated the following criteria for review and approval: May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4807-1= BASIC DEVELOPMENT COMPOSITION - 1. The 10.08 acre site will be developed with office and commercial uses with an approximate balance of 70% office and 30% commercial measured on a proportional basis of building area for the entire property. 2. Allowed uses will be those identified under 0-2 and C-2 classifications of office and commercial uses. 3. The property may be developed as a mix of individual lots and buildings, or multiple building on a single site. 4. Buildings may be for single or mixed use. BASIC DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES - 1. The layout of proposed building site improvements must be approved by the Planning Commission as an amendment to this POD application. 2. The maximum building height allowed shall conform to 0-2 height regulations. 3. All site lighting must be low-level, directed away from adjacent property, and shielded downward and onto the site. 4. All trash enclosures will be oriented away from boundary streets, screened with masonry enclosures, and gated with screened gate panels. 5. Use of outdoor speaker or Sound amplification system shall be prohibited on the property except for one-half hour before and after the users hours of being open to the general public. The operation of any such speaker and system is limited to those that do not emit sound that is plainly audible from adjoining properties or boundary streets. 6. All landscape and buffer areas will be provided to meet or exceed CLR ordinance requirements and provide a minimum street buffer of twenty-five feet along boundary streets. 7. All portions of the property will be landscaped to meet or exceed CLR ordinance requirements. PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS - 1. A traffic study will be provided by the developer to identify street improvements that will be recommended to service the proposed uses and to evaluate proposed alignments. 2. The developer will negotiate an agreement with CLR Public Works and Traffic Engineering for the installation of specific street improvements that will be required. 3. The developer will review related utility infrastructure needs with the various utility companies and negotiate agreements for the installation of specific utility improvements that will be required. 4. Rights-of-way and easements for required street, drainage, and utility improvements will be provided by the developer. 2 May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N (Cont. SIGNAGE GUIDELINES - FILE NO.: Z -4807-F 1. Monument style signage will be used and each sign will not exceed 10 feet in height or 100 square feet in area (as measured on one side). 2. Monument Signage may be used on a shared or individual basis among buildings and tenants. 3. Final signage locations must be approved by the Planning Commission as an amendment to this POD application. 4. All building wall signage must comply with CLR ordinance requirements based on the associated building use. GRADING & EXCAVATION GUIDELINES - 1. Preliminary grading will be done on this property as part of a larger overall grading plan and project for surrounding properties and roadways. This work will be done in advance of actual property, development. 2. The developer will provide an overall master grading plan covering this and surrounding properties to minimize future excavation work and related hauling operations that will occur at the actual time of development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: C 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 is the Villages of Wellington subdivision with new single-family homes under construction. Further north of the site are the Carrington Park Apartments (zoned MF -18) and a vacant 0-3 zoned tract. To the east is a MF -18 zoned tract, which as developed as 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. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area property owners. The property owners located within 200 -feet of the site, all residents located within 300 -feet of the site who could be identified along with the Parkway Place Property Owners Association, Margeaux Place Property Owners Association and the St. Charles Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. 4 May 25, 2006 ITEM 0 E. F : N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807-F ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: A traffic study has been provided for review by Public Works. After review, the study meets all Public Work's requirements. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Enerciv: 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. Water main extensions will be required in order to provide service to portions of this property. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department, Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planninn : No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. ISSUESITECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential and Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office District for future development of the property. A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Office Commercial is a separate item on this agenda. (File No. LU06-19-01) 4 May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807 - Master Street Plan: There is an amendment to the Master Street Plan before the Board of Directors in this area; the major change of this item would be the alignments. Wellington Hills Blvd, and Champlin Drive are shown as Arterials on the Plan. Kirk is shown as a Collector with a request to change it to an Arterial. An unnamed Collector has been requested for removal from the Plan between Chenal Parkway and Arkansas Systems Drive. An Arterial functions to move traffic through and around the urban area or from activity centers to the Arterial system. These roads are designed to be four or more lanes and move large numbers of vehicles at high speed. They are not intended to provide access to adjacent land. A Collector functions to bring vehicles from the neighborhoods to the Arterial system as well as to provide access to adjacent property. These roads are designed to be three -lane roads. None of these roads are built to standard. Right-of-way and street improvements will need to be made at the time of development. Bicycle Plan: The Master Street Plan, bicycle section, proposes a Class I bike route along Chenal Parkway. A Class I route has a separate pavement for the sole use of bicycles. City Reco nized Neighborhood Action Plan: The application area is within the Rock Creek Neighborhoods Plan area. The Neighborhood Plan calls for the protections and preservation of greenbelts with strict enforcement of the excavation and landscape ordinances. It also calls for the interconnection of the area with sidewalks and other non -motorized vehicle paths. The Plan calls for the completion of Champlin Drive and Villages of Wellington Road to Kanis Road, and construct the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Champlin Drive; fund with a bond issue (build prior to development). The Plan asks that amendments to the Land Use Plan be rare and only with the input of the neighborhood. Landscape: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 20, 2006) The applicants were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request and indicated there were two rezoning requests located within the immediate area and suggested the Committee discuss them simultaneously (Item 8 — File No. Z -4807-G and Item 9 File No. 4807-F). Staff stated the comments for each were very much the same. Staff stated a rezoning request from various zoning districts to POD was being requested north of Wellington Village Road and a rezoning request from C-1 and 0-2 to PCD was being requested for the south side of Wellington Village Road. Staff stated there were a number of outstanding issues associated with the request including the proposed development plan. May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807-F Mr. Robert Brown stated the developers were requesting a conceptual planned development to establish uses for the areas and once the final development plans were secured a revision to the zoning would be applied for and the Commission could then review the specifics of the site development plan. Staff stated the developers had given a list of criteria which would establish the review process. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development plan and the lack of a development plan. Commissioner Yates questioned why the request was not a rezoning to 0-2 and C-2 since the developers did not have specifics of the proposed developments. Mr. Brown stated with the current request the Commission would be allowed to review the proposed development prior to construction. Commissioner Yates noted both 0-2 and C-2 zoning districts required site plan review prior to development. Public Works commented the traffic study had been provided for review and the study met all Public Work's requirements. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised cover letter and site plan to staff addressing the issues raised at the April 20, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated directional signage will comply with ordinance standards, pedestrian access and circulation will be incorporated in the final design and dumpsters and trash receptacles will be serviced during daylight hours, comply with applicable codes for placement and not be located adjacent to residentially used property. The revised cover letter indicates the building design will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission as a part of an amendment to the conceptual POD application. Also all service docks are to be oriented away from streets and provided with proper screening. The proposal includes the development of this 10 acre site with a conceptual POD containing 70 percent office uses and 30 percent commercial uses. The maximum building square footage of the development will be tied to the proposed usage mix of the final development plan. There will be a maximum density of 20,000 square feet per acre of office uses and a maximum density of 10,000 square feet per acre of commercial uses. The maximum commercial area is 30,000 square feet based on the proposed usage mix. The maximum 0 May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4807-F area of restaurant use (as part of the maximum commercial area) will be 16,000 square feet. The maximum area for office uses will be based on previously stated densities which would allow 200,000 square feet if the site was developed entirely with office uses or 140,000 square feet based on the proposed use mix. One out -parcel is proposed for the site. The out parcel is proposed along the western portion of the site containing an estimated 2.0 acres. The maximum building height proposed for the office use buildings is 80 -feet and the maximum building height for the commercial use buildings is 45 -feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The applicant is requesting the approval of the proposed use mix and the placement of out parcels on the site with a maximum square footage identified of office and commercial uses. Limits have been placed on the building heights for office and commercial uses as well as limits placed on signage and dumpster locations. As proposed, a revision to the POD would be sought prior to development detailing the site plan and proposed building design for Planning Commission and City Board approval. To staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the proposal is appropriate to allow the future development of the area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 11, 2006) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation the item be deferred to the May 25, 2006, public hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve outstanding issues associated with the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. 7 May 25, 2006 NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807-F PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 25, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. The staff presentation included several items in the general area with various recommendations. For this specific application staff presented a recommendation of approval. Mr. Ernie Peters addressed the Commission detailing the results of a traffic study he had performed for the area based on the current future land use plan and the current zoning and based on the proposed changes to the future land use and zoning. He stated with the analysis he had assumed background growth of traffic for the area. He stated the area contained approximately 500 to 600 acres of undeveloped land. He stated assumptions were made including a 20 percent building footprint for the undeveloped properties. He stated based on the traffic study the volume would increase by approximately 1,500 cars per day if all the applications were approved. He stated with the Chenal rezoning request the traffic would increase by approximately 500 additional vehicles during peak hours and with the Wisenhunt rezoning request the increase would be approximately 1000 additional vehicles during peak hours. He stated this would result in a 22 to 24 percent increase. He stated if all the rezoning requests in the area were approved this would result in a moderate increase in traffic. He stated several intersections would operate at a less than desirable level with Arkansas Systems Drive being the worst functioning intersection. He stated the function of this intersection would not be worsened by the approval of the rezoning request. He stated improvements to Chenal Parkway, by the addition of lanes, would be required to facilitate traffic flows in the area. The Commission questioned the growth factor and time frame for build -out. Mr. Peters stated he made the assumption the area would build out but did not give a time frame for build out. He stated if the area was not built out in ten years additional background traffic should be added to the counts but he had not included this in his calculations. He stated the areas needed improvements were long-term. He stated the Wisehunt's were proposing to improve the intersection of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway, Kirk Road and Chenal Parkway and add an additional lane to Chenal Parkway adjacent to the existing Kroger Development. He stated the remaining roadway would need improvements via developers or with the expending of public funds. Staff noted the Board of Directors had adopted a Resolution indicting no public funds would be expanded on Chenal Parkway without a public vote. Staff stated to assume the public would fund the improvements was not a safe assumption. Commissioner Rahman stated he would like additional time to review the traffic study and information provided by Mr. Peters and requested a deferral of the item. Mr. Dick Downing, representative of the applicant, stated the owners did not have time for a deferral. He stated the time constraints were such that if the zoning were not approved May 25, 2006 ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4807-F the strict schedules imposed by the Fellowship Bible Church could not be met. Mr. Downing stated the developers were committed to infrastructure improvements abutting their ownership as required by the traffic study to facilitate traffic flows in the area. Mr. Downing stated the Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Master Street Plan to realign Wellington Hills and Kirk Roads and the changes proposed were specifically for the proposed development of the church and the current rezoning request. He stated the applicant's had performed a traffic study of the area and staff was providing a positive recommendation of the applications. He stated there was no opposition to the rezoning request. He stated based on the comments made by Mr. Peters the impact of traffic in the area would be moderate if the rezoning requests were approved. Mr. Randy Fraizer addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he was the representative of Fellowship Bible Church and they were supportive of the request. He stated the church's development was contingent on the Wisenhunt applications being approved. He stated he was present offering support and requested the Commission approval of the requested rezoning. Ms. Kathleen Olsen addressed the Commission with concerns. She stated with piece mill development there could be potentially be negative impacts. She stated there was a concern with stripping out the area and felt the planned development process a process which would avoid this potential. She stated based on the percentages given the impact could be limited but staff and the Commission should carefully consider each application to ensure strip development did not occur. Mr. Hank Kelley addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated his property was located to the west of the proposed rezoning site and felt the development as proposed would add value to the area. He stated he embraced an office and commercial development which would add potential restaurant uses to the area allowing nearby office workers options for eating as opposed to getting in their cars and driving a few miles for lunch. He stated with the construction of Kirk Road and Wellington Hills Road this would also assist in traffic flows in area allowing an alternate route to Chenal Parkway. There was a general discussion of the proposed development and the impact of traffic in the area. Traffic engineering staff stated they felt the proposed development would only have a minor impact on the roadways. Staff stated the developer was committed to infrastructure improvements in the area including signalization of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway and Kirk Road and Chenal Parkway as well as improvements to the intersections to facilitate traffic flows. A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 5 absent. E