Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4841-B Staff AnalysisMarch 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 NAME: Pinnacle Ford Long -form PCD FILE NO.- Z -4841-B LOCATION: South of Chenal Parkway, east of the Kanis Road intersection DEVELOPER: Pinnacle Ford 11200 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 13.5 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: 0-2 ALLOWED USES: Office and Institutional District PROPOSED ZONING: PCD and 0-2 PROPOSED USE: Automobile dealership for Lot 1 and Lot 2 remaining undeveloped at this time and zoned 0-2 VARIANCESIWAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: In June 1987, two rezoning application, Z-4840 and Z-4841 were filed for a portion of the land under consideration. The initial request involved 12.1 acres and a second added five acres for a total of 17 acres. One request was for an 0-3 reclassification, March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 {Cont. FILE NO.: Z-4841 -B and the other one requested a change to 0-3 and C-3. Z-4840 was withdrawn without prejudice, and Z-4841, the 0-3 proposal was denied by the Planning Commission. Ordinance No. 15,552 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 6, 1988, reclassified the property from R-2, Single-family to 0-2, Office and Institutional District. The adopted ordinance also placed restrictions on the development of the tract. The site was to have a 33 -foot landscaped or undisturbed buffer along the Rock Creek Parkway; a 35 -foot height limit for buildings; one access point on the Rock Creek Parkway; and a 40 -foot minimum building setback from the property line on the Rock Creek Parkway side. The developer indicated the development would be constructed as an "attractive office park". A. PROPOSALIRECUEST: The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from 0-2, Office and Institutional District to Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to allow the site to develop with two (2) lots, one containing an automobile dealership and the second lot remaining zoned 0-2. Lot 1 will contain 11.49 acres and Lot 2 will contain 2.0 acres. Pinnacle Ford is requesting to develop Lot 1 for their new car and used car operations. At present there are no development plans for Lot 2, which would be developed and final platted at a later date. The applicant is requesting a two year deferral of street improvements to Kanis Road for Lot 1. The applicant has indicated street improvements to Kanis Road for Lot 2 will be constructed with the final platting of the lot. The applicant has indicated two structures will be constructed on Lot 1. One will house the new car showroom and service areas and contains up to 31,400 square feet. The building also contains "hospitality zones" such as children's play area, customer work area with phone access, laptop stations, desktops etc., and a cafe for customers while waiting (not food service). The other building is for pre -owned vehicle sales and clean-up and contains approximately 3,600 square feet. Other development considerations included by the applicant are all exterior lighting will be focused inward to minimize or eliminate ambient light into adjacent neighborhoods, there will be no outside paging allowed at the dealership and there will be no off-loading of vehicles in the public right-of-way. The applicant has indicated a 100 -foot buffer along the east side of proposed Lot 1 with the area to be set aside as an undisturbed buffer adjacent to the residential property. There are no development plans for Lot 2 which is proposed to remain zoned 0-2, Office and Institutional District. 2 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The western portion of the site is vacant and cleared with trees remaining on the site along the eastern perimeter. The site is relatively flat with roadway access to both Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road. Chenal Parkway in this area is a divided roadway with the two eastbound lanes adjacent to the site. Kanis Road is an unimproved narrow road with open ditches for drainage. To the east of the site is a fully developed single-family neighborhood, Wood Creek. To the north of the site is the divided parkway with C-2 zoned property located to the north. The area to the south of the site is vacant 0-2 zoned property abutting Pride Valley Road extending to the west. A PCD is located southwest of the site which is currently an agriculture nursery. West of the site is Rock Creek with Kinco Construction Company buildings located on the western bank of the creek. Other uses in the area include a PD -C approved (construction has not taken place) for Parker Saturn automobile dealership located on the corner of Wellington Hills Road and Chenal Parkway, a church, a PCD for a home improvement store and a vacant C-3 zoned tract. The Kroger shopping center, also zoned PCD, is located on the southwest corner of Chenal Parkway and the current Kanis Road intersection. The Master Street Plan indicates Kanis Road turning north along the western boundary of the Kinco property to align with Wellington Hills Road. Kanis Road adjacent to this site is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls and letters of opposition to the proposed development. The Parkway Place Property Owners Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association, all residents located within 300 -feet of the site who could be identified and all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. In addition a neighborhood meeting was held November 11, 2003 at the Parkway Place Baptist Church. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed right-of-way dedication on Kanis Road meets the minor arterial standard. 3 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO,: J.1 Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4841-B 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5 -foot sidewalk with the planned development. Traffic Engineering comments are as follows: - Driveway needs to be designed according to Chenal Master Plan Standards - Driveway taper needs to be 150 -feet 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities. Submit cross sections demonstrating compliance with the terracing provisions of the land alteration ordinance. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location of storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 6. Hauling of fill material on or off the site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 7. The eastern -most driveway location does not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The drive can be moved west to 150 -feet from proposed Lot 2 or can share a single driveway with Lot 2. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: A 20 -foot easement behind the new right-of-way line for relocation of existing 30 overhead power line. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details. Center -Point Ene[g Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. This development will have minor impact on the CI March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUESITECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a car dealership. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda (Item #13 — File No. LU03-18-03). Landscape: The proposed western land use buffer is less than the fifty (50) foot average width requirement of the zoning ordinance. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen- plantings, is required along the eastern and western perimeters. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year -around requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible on this site. Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. City Recognized Nei hborhood 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. 5 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 6, 2003) Mr. Tim Daters and Mr. Gary Dean were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development indicating the site would require an amendment to the City's Future Land Use Plan. Staff noted there were additional items needed to complete the review of the proposed development. Staff questioned the applicant's intent with regard to the median. The applicant indicated they would not request the median be cleared as a part of the Master Parks Plan. Staff questioned placement of any proposed dumpsters, where the delivery of automobiles would be taken, the location of the service shop, the hours deliveries would be taken and if there would be an on-site auto body repair shop. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted special grading permits would be required prior to development. Staff also noted the storm water detention ordinance applied to the property. Staff requested the applicant relocate the driveway along Kanis Road to the west to 150 -feet or to share a drive with proposed Lot 2. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the western land use buffer was less than the fifty foot average width required per the zoning ordinance. Staff also noted a six foot high opaque screen would be required along the eastern and western perimeters. Mr. Dean questioned if the 100 -foot buffer would suffice for the required screening. Staff stated if the buffer remained evergreen, then the area would meet the requirement, otherwise the applicant would be required to plant shrubs in this area to provide the year around screening. Mr. Dean commented the property located to the west was zoned residentially but was not being used as a residential use. Staff noted the Planning Commission could deem the required screening unnecessary. Staff noted the required screening to the west was a fifty foot average. Staff also noted screening would be required adjacent to proposed Lot 2. There being no further items for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing a few of the issues raised at the November 6, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the location of the proposed dumpster and the required screening. The proposed dumpster is to be located adjacent to the proposed 100 -foot C.1 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J,1 {Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B undisturbed buffer. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed on three sides as required by the zoning ordinance at least two feet above the top of the container. The applicant has indicated there will not be a body shop at this site. The applicant has indicated the parts and service hours of operation from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 8:00 am to 4:00 pm Saturday. The sales hours of operation are proposed from 8:00 am to 8:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 9:00 am to 7:00 pm Saturday and Sunday. The applicant has indicated 125 customer and employee parking spaces, 56 service parking spaces and 419 display spaces. One hundred of the employee and customer parking spaces are around the new car showroom, which is adjacent to the proposed 100 -foot buffer. This area has separate gates for security to be closed during non -business hours. The applicant has also indicated a gates at all entrances to limit activity on the site when the business is not open. The gates are proposed as steel gates located across each drive of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway. The applicant has not relocated the driveway along Kanis Road. The applicant has indicated with the drive at the shown location there is a "straight shot' to the service shop for customer traffic and for delivery of automobiles. The driveway does not meet the minimum requirement for driveway spacing per city ordinances. In addition, the proposed street construction along Chenal Parkway does not meet the Chenal Parkway street design criteria established through Ordinance Numbers 16,622 and 16,652. The applicant has indicated signage on Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road. The proposed signage will comply with the Chenal Parkway Design Overlay District requirement for a monument style sign not to exceed eight feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. There is also a ground mounted monument sign proposed for Kanis Road. The applicant has indicated this sign will also comply with the Chenal Overlay requirements. The site plan includes a tract of 0-2 zoned property. Through the PCD the applicant is requesting the subdivision of this tract but is requesting the parcel remain zoned 0-2. The proposed lot meets the minimum requirement for the 0-2 zoning classification. The applicant is proposing the placement of 11 '.23 percent of the site including a 1.29 acre buffer along the eastern perimeter of the site as interior landscaping. The applicant has indicated the screening will be zoned OS too ensure the vitality of the area. The applicant has also indicated should the 100 -foot buffer not provide year around screening additional plantings will be installed. 7 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B Staff is not supportive of the proposed request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. The site adjoins a single-family neighborhood to the east and an elementary school is located in close proximity to the southeast. Currently the infrastructure is not in place to' allow customers traveling west bound to access the site. The applicant has indicated customers will access the site from Kanis Road, which staff questions. Staff also has concerns with the delivery of automobiles, both the logistics of how the automobiles will be delivered and the hours the automobiles will be delivered. The applicant has not indicated the proposed delivery hours. Staff also has concerns with the location where deliveries will be taken. Currently staff has problems with automobile dealers in the general area taking deliveries in the right-of-way. The site is adjacent to two principal arterials and delivery in the right-of-way would be extremely dangerous. Kanis Road is a two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage, Chenal Parkway is a four lane road with a median but is well traveled. Staff feels allowing the use to locate on the site will invite cut -through traffic through the existing Wood Creek Subdivision. Staff has concerns of the noise from the site. The applicant has indicated there will be no outdoor paging as a part of the development but there are other noises that the site will generate. The applicant has indicated a repair shop to be located on the site. The shop will potentially hold twenty-eight cars waiting for service and the applicant has indicated an area for express service with a potential for eight cars. Staff feels this would generate a large amount of noise from impact wrenches and traffic moving around the site. The applicant has requested a two year deferral of the required street improvements to Kanis Road. Staff is not supportive of this request. If the site is developed with a heavy commercial use (a C-4 commercial use) staff feels the street improvements should be put in place at the time of development. The applicant has indicated Kanis Road will be used to access the site for service and for the off-loading of inventory. As stated, staff is not supportive of the proposed request. Staff feels the rezoning of this site to a commercial classification will encourage additional commercial development in the area. The Parkway has commercial uses at each end and along the divided median the area is predominately residential. Staff feels this should remain the case with the office zoning providing a transition between the single-family homes to the east and the non -conforming commercial use located across Rock Creek. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the proposed request. 0 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: FILE NO.: Z (DECEMBER 4, 2003) `s-.] Mr. Joe White was present representing the request: There were several registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested this item be deferred to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 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 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 Recuse (Commissioner Pam Adcock). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 11, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were numerous registered objectors present. The Chair stated the Commission's past policy had been to allow an applicant to defer an item when eight or fewer Commissioners were present. The Chair noted with Commissioner Adcock recusing from the discussion there were only eight Commissioners present. Mr. Joe White stated on behalf of the applicant, he would like to request a deferral to the March 25, 2004 Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made and approved to defer the item to the March 25, 2004 Public Hearing by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recuse (Commissioner Pam Adcock). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004) Mr. James Deitz was present representing the request. There were several registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. 9 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B Mr. Deitz addressed the Commission discussing the merits of the request. He stated the proposed development indicated a 100 -foot zoned Open Space buffer adjacent to the single-family neighborhood to the east. He stated the site also included a 50 -foot buffer to the west adjoining Rock Creek. He stated the development contained eleven percent total landscaping or three acres of landscaping, which was more than the minimum required landscaping. He stated the improvements would be constructed to both Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway at the time of development as required by the Public Works comments in the staff report. He stated the site would be lite with down lighting to minimize spilling onto adjoining properties. He stated the owners had addressed all the concerns of the neighborhood with the exception of one. He stated the neighborhood did not want an automobile dealership, which was the request. Mr. Brian Gibson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated the neighborhood was not opposed to growth or to expansion. He stated the neighborhood was concerned with Smart Growth and Smart Development. He stated an automobile dealership was neither. Mr. Gibson stated the request was not in keeping with the neighborhood and was out of character with the neighborhood. He stated the residents were aware the property was zoned for an office use and a commercial uses was not what the residents had intended when they purchased their homes. Mr. Gibson stated the neighborhood recently completed an up -date to their neighborhood action plan. He stated as a part of the process the neighborhood reviewed the zoning and future land use plan for the area. He stated changes were not recommended for the site. He stated the neighborhood intended the site to develop as an office use to buffer the nearby commercial uses and allow a transition between the area commercial to the west and the single-family homes to the east. He stated the only comparable area was located on South University Avenue. He stated the dealership would be a quality development initially but the concern was ten to fifteen years in the future. He stated it was important to maintain the vitality of the neighborhood for the future. Mr. David Ebinger, Ms Sharon Taghizadeh, Mr. Bruce Maurer and Mr. Jerry Garrison chose not to addressed the Commission but indicated opposition to the proposed request. Mr. Stan Kligman addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated the residents were not in favor of the dealership locating on the site. He stated the representatives of the dealership had indicated 800 automobiles would be housed on the site. He stated this would generate traffic through the neighborhood with customer test driving automobiles and trying to find the entrance to the dealership. He stated the development of the site as a automobile dealership would reduce the value of their homes and reduce the quality of life the residents currently enjoyed. 10 March 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4841-B Mr. David Raley addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he was a resident of the Wood Creek Subdivision. He stated his concern was related to traffic and noise. Mr. Raley stated the dealership would have a repair shop which would generate noise from impact wrenches and the moving of automobiles. He stated there was a fear that the rezoning would generate additional commercial zonings in the area. Mr. Raley stated the existing zoning allowed a transition between the more intense commercial uses to the west and the homes to the east. Ms. Lenice Garrison addressed the Commission on behalf of the Parkway Place Neighborhood Association. She stated the neighborhood had met with the developers and review the proposed development plan and were not in favor of the rezoning request. She stated the neighborhood ws comfortable with the site developing as an office use. She stated the neighborhood had submitted to the Commission 35 -pages of names in opposition of the proposed request. She stated most of the homes had a 100 -foot back yard and even with the proposed buffer the dealership would be in the residents back yard. Mr. Deitz stated there would not be a body shop as part of the development. He stated the owners had generated traffic numbers based on the site as it could be developed vs. the proposed traffic generated from an automobile dealership. Mr. Deitz stated the dealership had committed to moving the door away from the neighborhood and heating and cooling the building to allow the doors to remain closed. He stated the automobile dealership would generate approximately 500 trips per day where an office development would generate 3000 to 3500 trips per day. He stated the development had committed to designating an area for off-loading of inventory and delivery would not be taken in the right-of-way. He stated the development had no intentions of clearing the median but the area was designated on the city's parks plan and the city could clear the median for development of the park at any time. Mr. Tim Daters addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the proposed development of an office complex was in compliance with the existing zoning. He stated the maximum building height would be 35 -feet and two story. He stated the buffer would be reduced to the minimum or 15 -feet. - He stated the site would contain smaller lots and smaller buffers than proposed by the automobile dealership. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the existing zoning allowable development of the site. Mr. Gibson stated the neighborhood was not concerned with the "what -ifs". He stated the neighborhood was comfortable with the site developing as a suburban office use. He stated the applicant had indicated maximum build -out not probable build -out. He stated an office was used in the day and quiet at night. A motion was made to approve the development as proposed. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 4 noes, 1 Absent, 1 Recuse (Commissioner Pam Adcock) and 1 Abstention (Commissioner Bill Rector). 11 ITEM NO.: 13.1 FILE NO.: Z-4841-13 NAME: Pinnacle Ford Long -form PCD i'-6 LOCATION: south of Chenal Parkway, east of Kanis Road Uw`� 19 Planning Staff Comments: V 1) 1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 -feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. �jrp 2. Staff would recommend the eastern 100 -foot buffer be zoned OS to maintain the integrity of the buffer. X�t 3. Provide the estimated number of trips per day the proposed car dealership will generate. a., " 4. Provide details concerning site lighting (pole height, lumens, pole style). 5. Will the applicant request the median be cleared as a part of the Master Parks Plan? 6- Will there be any automotive body repair conducted on the site? If so where will the auto's be stored waiting repair? 7. Where will delivery of new automobiles be taken and what are the anticipated hours of delivery? (Will the deliveries be made during normal business hours?) 8. The applicant has indicated there will be no outdoor paging on the site. 9. Will the ingress/egress isles be designated as no parking. �p 10. Provide the location of any proposed dumpsters along with the required screening. 11. Provide details of any proposed fencing and gating (height/construction material). Lj 12. Is there an on-site service area? Indicate the location on the proposed site plan. (Will there only be a service bay for eight automobiles?) 13. Provide the days and hours of operation in the general notes section of the site plan. 14. Will the street improvements be installed for both lots at the time of final platting of Lot 1? Will both lots be final platted or will they be final platted individually. ((�� VariancOVaivers: J-� 1. NonV requested. l� Pu i orks: 1. The prop Ved right-of-way dedication on Kanis Road meets the minor arterial standard. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5 -foot sidewalk with the planned development. Traffic Engineering comments are as follows: - Driveway needs to be designed according to Chenal Master Plan Standards - Driveway taper needs to be 150 -feet 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29186 (c) and (d) will be requires prior to any �Lr land clearing or grading activities. Submit cross sections demonstrating compliance with the terracing provisions of the land alteration ordinance. Site grading and drainage plans will ly_ need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location of storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. A special Gradin Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will aired per Section 8-283 prior to P 9 construction. --�-� �„ • _� ������ �,,,� 6. Hauling of fill material on or off the site aver municipal streets and roads required approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 7. The eastern -most driveway location does not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The drive can be moved west to 150 -feet from proposed Lot 2 or can share a single driveway with Lot 2. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Enter : A 20 -foot easement behind the new right-of-way line for relocation of existing 30 overhead power line. Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details. Center -Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a car dealership. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda (Item #13 — File No. LU03-18-03). Landscape; The proposed western land use buffer is less than the fifty (50) foot average width requirement of the zoning ordinance. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the eastern and western perimeters. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year -around requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommand.s preserving as many trees as feasible on this site. Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape `oraih nce requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, November 12, 2003.