Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5097-C Staff AnalysisOctober 31, 2002 ITEM NO.: 11 NAME: Wal-Mart Site Plan Review FILE NO.: Z -5097-C LOCATION: Southeast Corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER - Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. 2001 S.E. 10t" Street Bentonville, AR 72716-0550 AREA: 28.4 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 (7.84 acres subject to site plan review) CURRENT ZONING: C-3 ALLOWED USES: General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3 ENGINEER: Carlson Consulting Engineers 7731 Highway 70, Suite 210 Bartlett, TN 38133 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Retail — Wal-Mart Supercenter VARIANCESM/AIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1988, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 15,603, which rezoned several tracts of land as a part of the Deltic Master Plan from Residential zoning to various multi -family, office and commercial zoning districts. That action rezoned 7.860 acres located at the southeast corner of Highway 10 and Chenal October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Parkway from R-2 to C-3. The approval of the C-3 zoning was conditioned upon a site plan review, by the Planning Commission, prior to development and a provision of a 40 - foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. Ordinance No. 16,459 rezoned additional properties contained within the proposed Wal- Mart site. The Ordinance was approved by the Board of Directors on July 20, 1993, and rezoned 8.7051 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. Ordinance No. 18,628, adopted by the Board of Directors on January 2, 2002, rezoned an additional 10.92 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. This area was to the south of the C-3 zoned property and adjacent to Chenal Parkway. At the time of rezoning the applicant also requested and was approved rezoning further south. The zoning approved was 0-2 on 10+ acres adjacent to the Parkway and 10+ acres of OS zoning nearer the single-family neighborhood to the east. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: As a condition of the 1988 zoning, approximately six (6) acres of this site is subject to site plan review. The applicant intends to develop the 28.4 acres as a 210,396 square foot Wal-Mart Supercenter, associated parking and service areas. The parking lot consists of 988 parking spaces, including 24 handicap accessible parking spaces. Two driveways will provide access to the proposed project from Cantrell Road and two driveways from Chenal Parkway. The southernmost driveway on Chenal Parkway will be aligned opposite the existing Northfield Drive and is proposed to be signalized. This drive will be a shared drive with the currently undeveloped property to the south (zoned 0-2), thus helping to limit future access points on the Parkway. Improvements will be provided on Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road as coordinated with the City of Little Rock. The development will be buffered from surrounding developments by the required landscape buffer areas and internal landscaping. Additionally, the stormwater detention area is proposed to be located to the east of the building within the existing Entergy easement. The addition of low height landscaping within this presently clear-cut area will provide a visual enhancement to the Highway 10 Corridor. The placement of this landscaping will provide a significant buffer to those properties lying to the east of the development. Additionally, the OS zoned area to the south of the property will provide a substantial buffer immediately south of the proposed Wal-Mart building. By orienting the building to face Chenal Parkway, the building has been located at the furthest possible distance from those properties to the west and southwest of the development. K October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS - FILE NO.: Z -5097-C The site is a vacant, heavily wooded site. Chenal Parkway, in this area, is a two lane road and Cantrell Road is a four lane road with a center turn lane at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. Other uses in the area include a Quick Stop Service Station on the northwest corner and mini -warehouses on the northeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. The southwest corner is zoned C-3, General Commercial and is currently undeveloped. There is an Entergy easement along the east property line with a church located further to the east of the site. Vacant 0-2 zoned property is located to the south of the site with OS zoned property located between the office zoning and the single-family residential located further south and east of the proposed development. South and west of the proposed development are also single-family residences adjoining vacant 0-2 and C-2 zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writings Staff has received numerous phone calls in opposition to the proposed development. Staff has also received several phone calls in support of the proposed development. The Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association and the DuQuesne Place Property Owners Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway are classified on the Master Street Plan as principal arterials. A minimum dedication of right-of-way to 55 -feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of the streets conforming to Master Street pan. Construct one- half street improvements to these streets, including 5 -foot sidewalk, with planned development. 3. Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standard. 4. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 5. Plans of all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 3 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C 6. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required Section 29-186(e). Also provide critical cross sections through the site that demonstrate compliance with the cut and fill requirements of the land alteration ordinance. 7. Grading permits are required prior to construction. 8. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Provide easements for detention. 9. An NPDES permit will be required for this project. Contact the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality for approval prior to the start of work. 10. Provide the direction of flow and all stormwater flows (Q) entering and leaving the site. 11. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 12. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 13.Obtain permits (barricade/street cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in the right-of- way. 14. Obtain permits for improvements within the State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. ARKLA: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water: It is recommended that water service be taken off the 16 -inch water main on the east side of Chenal Parkway. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 to discuss this option. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning_: No comment received. CATA: At this time the site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. However, CATA would like to have bus access on this site similar to the Wal-Mart on Bowman Road. 4 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAUDESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. FILE NO.: Z -5097-C City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The site is located in an area that is not currently covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan. Landscape Issues: The width of the proposed perimeter landscape strip north of the proposed drive -way, which leads to Chenal Parkway, drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and the nine (9) feet required by the Landscape Ordinance. Additionally, the width of the proposed northwestern perimeter landscape strip drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed northeastern parking lot needs additional interior landscaping. Interior landscape islands must be at least three hundred (300) square feet in area. Interior islands adjacent to the area marked "future development area" need to be increased to at least three hundred (300) square feet in area and be designated for interior landscaping in order to help distribute interior trees throughout the parking area. The fifty (50) foot wide existing Entergy easement must be legally abandoned in order to count toward fulfilling land use buffer requirements. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plants are required along the eastern perimeter on the site. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year -around screening requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required. Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide an approved Landscape Plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible on this tree -covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance and Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Building Codes: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 10, 2002) Mr. Dean Carlson and Mr. Joseph Parsley of Carlson Consulting Engineers were present representing the application. Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, presented the parameters of the site plan review. He stated 7 acres were previously subject to site plan review. He stated 2 acres of the 7 were not a part of the Wal-Mart development. He stated the review was a technical review and if the applicant met the requirements of the ordinance, the development should be approved. Staff then presented the site plan to the Committee and requested additional information be shown on the site plan. Staff stated the parking was more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking requirement. Staff requested the applicant indicate a cross access easement to Lot 1 of. Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision. Public Works requested cross sections and grading plans. Staff stated the site was a rather large site and cross sections would be necessary to determine the need for variances from the Land Alteration Ordinance. Staff questioned the detention location. Staff stated they would require in writing approval from Entergy for placement of the detention under the power lines. Staff stated this was not a common practice and verification would ease any future concerns. Additional landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant must follow through with the formal abandonment (or have a long term binding agreement) of the portion of the easement desired to serve as the land use buffer and allow the easement to serve as the required buffering. There was discussion concerning the traffic light at Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway. Staff stated the traffic light would be paid for by the developers. Staff stated Deltic would contribute 50% of the cost, Northwest Territory would pay 20% and Wal-Mart would pay the remaining 30%. There was a question as to if the Bowman store would be closed as a result of the development. Mr. Carlson stated it would not. He stated the new store was a supercenter where the Bowman store was only a retail center. Staff questioned if there would be any outside storage. The applicant indicated there would not. He stated the Chenal Design Review Committee had indicated there was to be no outdoor storage, display or sales of merchandise and the store would have an expanded stock room and garden center to accommodate the seasonal items. C October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C There being no further issues for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to Staff addressing most of the issues raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided a copy of the lease agreement between Entergy and the applicant indicating the use of the eastern fifty feet of the Entergy right-of-way. The agreement states vegetation growth may not exceed 12 -feet in height and that Entergy and its successors will not cut any trees, plants or natural vegetative growth within the Green Belt Buffer if such would result in the buffer not being in compliance with the applicable buffer ordinance of the City of Little Rock. The applicant has also indicated interior islands of the parking area will conform to the three hundred (300) square feet area requirement. The applicant has indicated a twenty-five (25) foot landscape strip along the area north of the proposed driveway (from Chenal Parkway). The applicant has also indicated access will be provided to the previously platted lot (Lot 1 Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision). Due to the terrain in the area the exact access location has not been determined but as requested by Staff the applicant has agreed this access will be provided when a suitable location is determined and agreed to by Staff and both property owners. The applicant is proposing two ground -mounted signs. One is to be located at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive the second near the primary drive from Cantrell Road. The sign proposed for Northfield Drive is proposed at forty (40) square feet in area, well within the Chenal Overlay District requirements for signage (maximum of eight (8) feet in height and one hundred (100) square feet in area). The sign proposed along Cantrell Road is proposed at six (6) feet in height and seventy-two (72) square feet in area; complying with the highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. Site lighting has been addressed. The applicant has indicated site lighting will be provided by 1000 watt metal halide fixtures on 40 -foot black steel poles. The applicant states fixtures shall contain all horizontal bulbs with flat lenses to control glare and over spill of lighting. The site plan states lights will be directed away from adjoining properties and no floodlights will be used. The applicant has indicated 988 parking spaces as part of the development. The typical minimum parking required would be 701 spaces. The proposed parking is 7 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5097-C more than sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking required by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has indicated all comments provided by Public Works will be adhered to. The applicant has contracted with a traffic engineer to determine what road improvements will be required as a part of the development. This information is not available at this time and will be forthcoming to the Commission at the October 31St Public Hearing. The applicant and the property owner of Lot 1 Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision have agreed to allow the internal driveway to act as an internal street to route motorists to the traffic light at Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive. This will remove the need for a median break (previously approved Ordinance No, 17,870) allowing left turns onto Chenal Parkway. Previous preliminary plat approvals have secured the funding for a portion of the traffic signal at Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. Deltic has agreed to pay 50% of the cost (S-867-NNN - Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision Preliminary Plat - November 1998) and Pfeifer Development Company will fund 20% of the cost (S -200-D - Northwest Territory Preliminary Plat - October 1997). The applicant has agreed to contribute the remaining 30% of the cost as a part of this development. The landscaping, building setbacks and signage conform to all provisions of the Chenal Overlay District and the Highway 10 Overlay District. Otherwise, to Staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed site plan review. Staff is supportive of the proposed site plan and feels the applicant has met the intent of the ordinance with regard to setbacks, buffer requirements, landscaping requirements, parking ratios and all other technical aspects of the ordinance. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the site plan review subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 2002) Mr. Dean Carlson and Mr. Ernie Peters were present representing the application. There were objectors present. Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, detailed the Commission's role in the site plan review. Staff presented the proposed development along with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated the development was to be an entirely closed development with on outside sales of seasonal items or storage container for excess inventory. 8 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5097 - Mr. Dean Carlson of Carlson Consulting Engineers detailed the project to the Commission. He stated the development would be required to appear before the Chenal Valley Design Review Committee prior to construction. He stated detailed building elevations were not available since Wal-Mart and the DRC had not reached an agreement with regard to building materials. Mr. Ernie Peters presented the traffic study to the Commission indicating the level of service at the primary intersections during peek hours would not be reduced but would in fact be enhanced. Mr. Peters stated there were basic assumptions made when the traffic model was presented. One of which was that 40 percent of the traffic would be from the east, 20 percent would be from the west, 5 percent from the north, 2 percent from Northfield and 33 percent from the south. He stated the infrastructure would be in place prior to the opening of the store. Mr. Carlson stated Wal-Mart was agreeable to the request of Central Arkansas Transit. He stated the store would install a bus shelter and the required curb radius as requested. Mr. Mark Wright spoke on behalf of the property owners of Lot 1. He stated the property owners of Lot 1 had been working with Wal-Mart to ensure clear access to the separate lot and not allow the traffic from Lot 1 and Wal-Mart to be conflicting. He requested prior to a building permit being issued that an agreement between the two (2) property owners be executed and duly filed. Mr. Chris Palmer spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated the current proposal allowed for seven (7) lanes of traffic to be dumped into a two (2) lane roadway. He also stated with the proposed lighting there would be a tremendous overspill of lighting to neighboring properties. He requested the developer install 30 -foot poles as opposed to 40 -foot poles and reduce the wattage of bulbs to 400 watts. Mr. Palmer requested the Commission not approve the site plan until a building design had been presented. Mr. Sharp Malak spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated he had concerns with the environmental impacts of the proposed development. He stated 6000 cars per day was not as likely to cause health problems as 20,000 to 30,000 cars per day. Mr. Malak stated he had stood at the entrance to the Aberdeen Subdivision on Saturday and within one and one-half hours had received the signatures of twenty-five percent of the homeowners in opposition of the proposed development. Ms. Alicia Finch, President of Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated traffic on Highway 10 was severely congested and the addition of a Supercenter would only add to the traffic October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C congestion. She stated the site was a part of the watershed for Pinnacle Mountain. She questioned the use of a utility easement as a detention basin was an acceptable practice. Ms. Finch stated the development would be approved. She stated the concern of the residents was the non-involvement. She stated the residents should be allowed to be involved in the design process to ensure a compatible architectural style. Mr. Brent Sawrie spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his opposition was to the increased traffic flow into a Supercenter store. He stated the traffic projections indicated 20 percent of the traffic from the west. He questioned this assumptions stating Perry County was the least populated county in the state. Mr. Tom Draper spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He presented the Commission with a petition from the property owners opposed to the development. He presented a history of the rezoning of the property to the south of the site indicating Staff had stated there was sufficient commercially zoned property in the area only to change their recommendation six weeks later when the applicant increased the acreage of the proposed rezoning and added office and open space zoning classifications to the request. He questioned when Chenal Parkway would be expanded to a four (4) lane roadway. Ms. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, spoke of the proposed development citing scale as the reason for opposition. She stated proposed development was a regional development and would impact the region not just the neighborhoods around the site. She stated the proposed parking was 100+ spaces more than was required by the typical minimum parking requirements and questioned if the applicant would consider reducing the number of spaces. She stated the proposed development did not appear to be something that would fit but was just a big development. Mr. Kevin Sebrowski spoke in opposition to the proposed development. He stated he was not opposed to commercial development but to the proposed project. He stated the proposed development did not fit into the neighborhood. He stated the Wal-Mart store on Bowman was not in close proximity to a residential neighborhood like the proposed development on Chenal and Highway 10. Mr. Chris Stuart spoke in opposition to the proposed development. He stated he and his wife purchase their home to escape the urban sprawl of Little Rock. He quoted from the Chenal brochures stating this type development was not a part of their Master Plan as presented to homeowners. He stated with the development of a Wal-Mart on the site property values would be severely impacted and residents would be trying to escape. 10 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO._Z-5097-C Staff addressed the topic of detention. Staff stated the use of easements for detention was a common practice in the city. Staff stated the city did not have criteria in place for the location of detention under power lines and the applicant had indicated all city ordinances would be adhere to and met. Staff stated Chenal Parkway would be -widened to a four (4) lane roadway at the point when the traffic counts reached 12,000 cars per day. Staff stated the counts were very close currently and the proposed development would more than likely trigger the street improvements. Staff stated the proposed design was not new but was in fact the Master Street Plan requirements which had been put in place many years ago. There was a general discussion concerning access points, street improvements and site lighting. The applicant agreed to amend the application to include 30 -foot poles with 400 watt bulbs. A motion was made to approve the proposed development as filed to include all Staff recommendations and comments. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no and 2 absent. 11 October 31, 2002 ITEM NO.: 11 NAME: Wal-Mart Site Plan Review FILE NO.: Z -5097-C LOCATION: Southeast Corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 2001 S.E. 10th Street Bentonville, AR 72716-0550 AREA: 28.4 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 (7.84 acres subject to site plan review) CURRENT ZONING: C-3 ALLOWED USES- General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3 ENGINEER: Carlson Consulting Engineers 7731 Highway 70, Suite 210 Bartlett, TN 38133 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Retail — Wal-Mart Supercenter VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1988, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 15,603, which rezoned several tracts of land as a part of the Deltic Master Plan from Residential zoning to various multi -family, office and commercial zoning districts. That action rezoned 7.860 acres located at the southeast corner of Highway 10 and Chenal October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Parkway from R-2 to C-3. The approval of the C-3 zoning was conditioned upon a site plan review, by the Planning Commission, prior to development and a provision of a 40 - foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. Ordinance No. 16,459 rezoned additional properties contained within the proposed Wal- Mart site. The Ordinance was approved by the Board of Directors on July 20, 1993, and rezoned 8.7051 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. Ordinance No. 18,628, adopted by the Board of Directors on January 2, 2002, rezoned an additional 10.92 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. This area was to the south of the C-3 zoned property and adjacent to Chenal Parkway. At the time of rezoning the applicant also requested and was approved rezoning further south. The zoning approved was 0-2 on 10+ acres adjacent to the Parkway and 10+ acres of OS zoning nearer the single-family neighborhood to the east. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: As a condition of the 1988 zoning, approximately six (6) acres of this site is subject to site plan review. The applicant intends to develop the 28.4 acres as a 210,396 square foot Wal-Mart Supercenter, associated parking and service areas. The parking lot consists of 988 parking spaces, including 24 handicap accessible parking spaces. Two driveways will provide access to the proposed project from Cantrell Road and two driveways from Chenal Parkway. The southernmost driveway on Chenal Parkway will be aligned opposite the existing Northfield Drive and is proposed to be signalized. This drive will be a shared drive with the currently undeveloped property to the south (zoned 0-2), thus helping to limit future access points on the Parkway. Improvements will be provided on Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road as coordinated with the City of Little Rock. The development will be buffered from surrounding developments by the required landscape buffer areas and internal landscaping. Additionally, the stormwater detention area is proposed to be located to the east of the building within the existing Entergy easement. The addition of low height landscaping within this presently clear-cut area will provide a visual enhancement to the Highway 10 Corridor. The placement of this landscaping will provide a significant buffer to those properties lying to the east of the development. Additionally, the OS zoned area to the south of the property will provide a substantial buffer immediately south of the proposed Wal-Mart building. By orienting the building to face Chenal Parkway, the building has been located at the furthest possible distance from those properties to the west and southwest of the development. 2 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: FILE NO.: Z -5097-C The site is a vacant, heavily wooded site. Chenal Parkway, in this area, is a two lane road and Cantrell Road is a four lane road with a center turn lane at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. Other uses in the area include a Quick Stop Service Station on the northwest corner and mini -warehouses on the northeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. The southwest corner is zoned C-3, General Commercial and is currently undeveloped. There is an Entergy easement along the east property line with a church located further to the east of the site. Vacant 0-2 zoned property is located to the south of the site with OS zoned property located between the office zoning and the single-family residential located further south and east of the proposed development. South and west of the proposed development are also single-family residences adjoining vacant 0-2 and C-2 zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writings Staff has received numerous phone calls in opposition to the proposed development. Staff has also received several phone calls in support of the proposed development. The Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association and the DuQuesne Place Property Owners Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS; 1. Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway are classified on the Master Street Plan as principal arterials. A minimum dedication of right-of-way to 55 -feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of the streets conforming to Master Street pan. Construct one- half street improvements to these streets, including 5 -foot sidewalk, with planned development. 3. Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standard. 4. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 5. Plans of all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 3 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C 6. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required Section 29-186(e). Also provide critical cross sections through the site that demonstrate compliance with the cut and fill requirements of the land alteration ordinance. 7. Grading permits are required prior to construction. 8. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Provide easements for detention. 9. An NPDES permit will be required for this project. Contact the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality for approval prior to the start of work. 10. Provide the direction of flow and all stormwater flows (Q) entering and leaving the site. 11. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 12. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping, Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 13.Obtain permits (barricade/street cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in the right-of- way. 14.Obtain permits for improvements within the State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. ARKLA: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water: It is recommended that water service be taken off the 16 -inch water main on the east side of Chenal Parkway. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 to discuss this option. Fire_ Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: At this time the site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. However, CATA would like to have bus access on this site similar to the Wal-Mart on Bowman Road. 4 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. FILE NO.: Z -5097-C City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The site is located in an area that is not currently covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan. Landscape Issues: The width of the proposed perimeter landscape strip north of the proposed drive -way, which leads to Chenal Parkway, drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and the nine (9) feet required by the Landscape Ordinance. Additionally, the width of the proposed northwestern perimeter landscape strip drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed northeastern parking lot needs additional interior landscaping. Interior landscape islands must be at least three hundred (300) square feet in area. Interior islands adjacent to the area marked "future development area" need to be increased to at least three hundred (300) square feet in area and be designated for interior landscaping in order to help distribute interior trees throughout the parking area. The fifty (50) foot wide existing Entergy easement must be legally abandoned in order to count toward fulfilling land use buffer requirements. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plants are required along the eastern perimeter on the site. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year -around screening requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required. Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide an approved Landscape Plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible on this tree -covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance and Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Building Codes: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 10, 2002) Mr. Dean Carlson and Mr. Joseph Parsley of Carlson Consulting Engineers were present representing the application. Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, presented the parameters of the site plan review. He stated 7 acres were previously subject to site plan review. He stated 2 acres of the 7 were not a part of the Wal-Mart development. He stated the review was a technical review and if the applicant met the requirements of the ordinance, the development should be approved. Staff then presented the site plan to the Committee and requested additional information be shown on the site plan. Staff stated the parking was more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking requirement. Staff requested the applicant indicate a cross access easement to Lot 1 of. Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision. Public Works requested cross sections and grading plans. Staff stated the site was a rather large site and cross sections would be necessary to determine the need for variances from the Land Alteration Ordinance. Staff questioned the detention location. Staff stated they would require in writing approval from Entergy for placement of the detention under the power lines. Staff stated this was not a common practice and verification would ease any future concerns. Additional landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant must follow through with the formal abandonment (or have a long term binding agreement) of the portion of the easement desired to serve as the land use buffer and allow the easement to serve as the required buffering. There was discussion concerning the traffic light at Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway. Staff stated the traffic light would be paid for by the developers. Staff stated Deltic would contribute 50% of the cost, Northwest Territory would pay 20% and Wal-Mart would pay the remaining 30%. There was a question as to if the Bowman store would be closed as a result of the development. Mr. Carlson stated it would not. He stated the new store was a supercenter where the Bowman store was only a retail center. Staff questioned if there would be any outside storage. The applicant indicated there would not. He stated the Chenal Design Review Committee had indicated there was to be no outdoor storage, display or sales of merchandise and the store would have an expanded stock room and garden center to accommodate the seasonal items. 6 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C There being no further issues for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to Staff addressing most of the issues raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided a copy of the lease agreement between Entergy and the applicant indicating the use of the eastern fifty feet of the Entergy right-of-way. The agreement states vegetation growth may not exceed 12 -feet in height and that Entergy and its successors will not cut any trees, plants or natural vegetative growth within the Green Belt Buffer if such would result in the buffer not being in compliance with the applicable buffer ordinance of the City of Little Rock. The applicant has also indicated interior islands of the parking area will conform to the three hundred (300) square feet area requirement. The applicant has indicated a twenty-five (25) foot landscape strip along the area north of the proposed driveway (from Chenal Parkway). The applicant has also indicated access will be provided to the previously platted lot (Lot 1 Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision). Due to the terrain in the area the exact access location has not been determined but as requested by Staff the applicant has agreed this access will be provided when a suitable location is determined and agreed to by Staff and both property owners. The applicant is proposing two ground -mounted signs. One is to be located at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive the second near the primary drive from Cantrell Road. The sign proposed for Northfield Drive is proposed at forty (40) square feet in area, well within the Chenal Overlay District requirements for signage (maximum of eight (8) feet in height and one hundred (100) square feet in area). The sign proposed along Cantrell Road is proposed at six (6) feet in height and seventy-two (72) square feet in area; complying with the highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. Site lighting has been addressed. The applicant has indicated site lighting will be provided by 1000 watt metal halide fixtures on 40 -foot black steel poles. The applicant states fixtures shall contain all horizontal bulbs with flat lenses to control glare and over spill of lighting. The site plan states lights will be directed away from adjoining properties and no floodlights will be used. The applicant has indicated 988 parking spaces as part of the development. The typical minimum parking required would be 701 spaces. The proposed parking is 7 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C more than sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking required by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has indicated all comments provided by Public Works will be adhered to. The applicant has contracted with a traffic engineer to determine what road improvements will be required as a part of the development. This information is not available at this time and will be forthcoming to the Commission at the October 31St Public Hearing. The applicant and the property owner of Lot 1 Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision have agreed to allow the internal driveway to act as an internal street to route motorists to the traffic light at Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive. This will remove the need for a median break (previously approved Ordinance No, 17,870) allowing left turns onto Chenal Parkway. Previous preliminary plat approvals have secured the funding for a portion of the traffic signal at Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. Deltic has agreed to pay 50% of the cost (S-867-NNN - Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision Preliminary Plat - November 1998) and Pfeifer Development Company will fund 20% of the cost (S -200-D - Northwest Territory Preliminary Plat - October 1997). The applicant has agreed to contribute the remaining 30% of the cost as a part of this development. The landscaping, building setbacks and signage conform to all provisions of the Chenal Overlay District and the Highway 10 Overlay District. Otherwise, to Staffs knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed site plan review. Staff is supportive of the proposed site plan and feels the applicant has met the intent of the ordinance with regard to setbacks, buffer requirements, landscaping requirements, parking ratios and all other technical aspects of the ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the site plan review subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. N 10/10/02 THU 15:29 FAX ;ent 09/_19/2002 at 14:23:25 — £rom to — 501 490 4740 p315 80 48 02 p„ eOTed it; GREEN BELT BUFFER RE STRICTIf?hlH,IR-K ST " sof Fees U TIRT 14, 89 f:kK KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: WHERE AS, Entergy Arkan.�s, Inc. ("Entergy") has a right-of-way over, upon and across the following real property owned by Deltic Timber Corporation ("Deltic"), to -wit: A right of way 280 feet wide across the W"/2 NE 1/4 of Section 22 and the it 1/2 W �; Sl_ 1/4 of Section 15, all in Township 2 North Range 14 'West, Pulaski County. Arkansas, said right of way extending 140 feet on each side of the center line of the proposed right of way, said center find being more particularly described as: BEOINNING at a point on the South line of said W,1/2 NE 1/4 140 feel, more or less, Wast of'the SE corner thereof, thence North 4 degrees 33 minutes more or lc n Weal 2170 feel, more or less, to an angle: point; thence North 4 degrees 50 minutes West 1325 feet, more or less to an angle point; thence North 3 degrees 00 minutes more or Iecs West 570 feet, more or less to an angle point; thence North 3 degrees 35 minutes West 1,160 feet, more or less, to a point of Termination on the North line of said E, ti W 'i_ SE. 1/4 140 feet, West of the NI; confer thereof, subject to existing transmission line right of way ("Right -)f -Way"), for thepurpow oferectiugitstransmission lines and facilities on said Right -os Way andthe right to koep said Right -of -Way clear of obstructions which may or 'night he a hazard to said lines; WHEREAS, Deltic desires for Entergy to restrict and dedicate the use ofthe castem fifty (50) feet ofthe flight -of -Way as a green belt buffer in order to enhance the possibility of the development of real property owned by Deltic. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) in hand paid by Deltic. the premises, mutual covenants and agreements contained herein and other good and valuable consideration- the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Entergy hereby agrees as follows: I . Use Restriotinnti. Except for its use by Entergy, its successors and assigns, for overhead electrical lines. Entergy hereby restricts and dedi catea the use ofthe eastern fifty (5t1) feat ofthe Rigt*Itt- of-Way, to-wil: Part of Section 15, T -2-N, R -14-W, Pulaski County, Arkansas, more particularly described as: r3eginning at the intersection of the South right-of-way line of Arkansas State Hwy. # Ct:rmu-MIMmenp%+mem= mph This instrumcntprcparcd by.- FRIDAY. y:FRIDAY. ELDREDGit do (;LARK N(IO Firsr Co,nmcmial Huilding 400 west C:Spiwj Lirtle Rack. Arkansas 721,01-3493 ]aMV$ C Clark. Jr. 09/19/02 THU 13:28 1Tx/R3 NO 51491 lij002 10/10/02 THU 15:29 FAX gent 09/19/2002 at 14:23:49 — from to — 501 490 4740 p4/5 111 and the East line of the NW1/4 SE 1/4 of said Section 1S; thence S01o5219"W along said Ewa line, 882.03 fl.; thence N88034'02"W, 50.00 fL; thence NO 1052'19"E along a line 50.00 ft. West of and parallel with said East Line of the NW1/4 SEI/4, 885.31 ft. to a point on the said South right-of-way line of Arkansas State Hwy. # 10; thence N73 008'59" E along said South right-of-way line. 0.80 ft.; thence S84o 13'50"E continuing along said South right-of-way line, 49.36 ft. to the point of beginning, containing 1.0 146 acres more or less ("Green Belt Buffer"), as a Green Belt Buffer upon which Dalti 4, Et5 a,;ucc snlrs and assigns, rreay, at its sole discretion, improve try planting, at their sole expense, trees, plants, or other vegetative growth nectgsary to bring the [`ween Bait Buflr;vr into compliance with the applicable buffer- ordinances ofthe City of Little Rock, Arkansas. 2. Con[inuedllse of Ri • t-0f-Wa . The dedication and granting ofthis Green Belt Buffer docs not restrict the access of Entergy, its suc"'Mrs or assigns, to the Green Belt Buffer forthe purpose of maintenance, repair or replacement of its overhead cle triL-a1 trar>,smission lines. 3. Heiat Restrictions, No tree. plant, or other vegetative growth within the Green Belt Bufficr shall exceed twelve (12) feet in height. 4. Removal of Vz dative Growth. Other than maintaining the vegetative growth at a height not to exceed twelve (12) feet, Entergy, its successors and assigns, will not cut any VeLq, plants or other natural vegetative growth within the Green Belt Buffer if such would result in the Green Belt Buffer not being in compliance with the applicable buffer ordinances of the City of Little Rock. 5. Term. The restrictions contained herein shall be perpetual to the extent permitted by law and shall run with the real property described herein. EXECUTED this `! t' day of Sit �► her 2002. ENTERGY ARKANSAS, INC. AC%NOWLFnCTMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS �'titm�11FP11.4metsmpMmmcvo ep4 2 09/19/02 THU 13:28 (TI/RX NO 51491 lih 003 Subdivision Committee Meeting October 10, 2002 ITEM NO.: 11 "`� 'A� a 'r NAME: Wal-Mart Site Plan Review XiTeRwi701 Southeast Corner of CantrreLoad and ChenaI& way cae.. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. �"�c� Carlson Consulting Engineers 2001 S.E. 10t" Street7731 Highway 70, Suite 210 Bentonville, AR 72716-0550 Bartlett, TN 38133 l� AREA: 28.4 Acre NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET- 0 1 w CURRENT ZONING: C-3 (7 acres subject to site plan review) ALLOWED USES: General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3�'�� PROPOSED USE: General Commercial —Wal-Mart i VARIAN CESMAIVE RS REQUESTED: None requested _D'�_f - kk)�-,-,M1� PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: kt A 5coo 1. Provide a certified list of property owners within 200 -feet of the site a'fong with notice form, affidavit executed, and proof of mailing. 2. Give details of the proposed signage. (Height/Area) 3. Locate the dumpster on the site plan and indicate screening. 4. Provide a vicinity map to scale on the site plan. 5. Locate any proposed fencing on the site plan with details. (Height/Materials) 6. Any additional site lighting must be low level and directed away from residentially zoned property. 7. Typical minimum parking required 701 spaces — 1037 spaces provided. 8. Provide an access easement to the lot located north of the access drive from Chenal Parkway. � a ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 00)5 �., irk,) kBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:�nn • ma c.'-� &--,� • W�� �,. No comment receivedCX. Subdivision Committee Meeting October 10, 2002 UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: ARKLA: Southwestern Bell - Water: It is recommended that water service be taken off the 16 -inch water main on the east side of Chenal Parkway. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 to discuss this option. Fire Department: County Planning: No comment received. CATA: At this time the site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. However, CATA would like to have bus access on this site similar to the Wal-Mart on Bowman Road. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment- Landscape omment. Landsca a Issues. The width of the proposed perimeter landscape strip north of the proposed drive -way which leads to Chenal Parkway, drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and the nine (9) feet required by the Landscape Ordinance. Additionally, the width of the proposed northwestern perimeter landscape strip drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed northeastern parking lot needs additional interior landscaping. Interior landscape islands must be at least three hundred (300) square feet in area. Interior islands adjacent to the area marked "future development area" need to be increased to at least three hundred (300) square feet in area and be designated for interior landscaping in order to help distribute interior trees throughout the parking area. The fifty (50) foot wide existing AP&L easement must be legally abandoned in order to count toward fulfilling land use buffer requirements. Subdivision Committee Meeting October 10, 2002 A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plants are required along the eastern perimeter on the site. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year -around screening requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required. Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide an approved Landscape Plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible on this tree -covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance and Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. Building Codes: No comment. REVISED PLAT/PLAN: SUBMIT FOUR (4) COPIES OF A REVISED SITE PLAN (TO INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS NOTED ABOVE) TO STAFF NO LATER THAN NOON ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2002. October, 30, 1997 ITEM NO.: A NAME: Northwest Territory Preliminary Plat FILE NO.: S -200-D LOCATION: North side of Hwy. 10 between Chenal Parkway and Hwy. 300 intersection DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Pfeifer Development Co. White-Daters Engineers 400 East 13th St. 401 Victory Street No. Little Rock, AR 72114 Little Rock, AR 72201 375-1246 374-1666 AREA: 43.06 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 10 FT. NEW STREET: 1,500 ZONING: R-2, MF -18, C-2, 0-3 and C-3 PLANNING DISTRICT: #20 Pinnacle CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCESIWAIVERS REQUESTED: None A. PROPOSAL• The owner received plat approval in 1991 but allowed it to lapse after one year. This resubmittal is basically.the same lot arrangement. The only changes are in the area of Lot 1 that was recently approved for a mini -storage, as a PCD. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This 40 plus acres is varied terrain with the steep slopes and more difficult land in the large future development tract. There is nothing constructed on the property at this time except the Chenal Parkway extension. The land is in a sparsely developed area with a few scattered houses along Hwy. 10 and a church at Hwy. 360 intersection. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: None at this writing, no organized neighborhoods nearby. October,30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: s -200-D D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Provide for street lights, contact Traffic Engineering. 2. National Pollutant Discharge System (NPDES) and grading permits are required prior to construction, site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved. 3. St"ormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 4. Inclusion of Chenal Parkway in the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial should be a part of this approval process. 5. An additional 10 feet right-of-way will be required west of Chenal Parkway at Highway 10 north of Chenal Parkway at Hwy. 300 and at all planned commercial streets for future right -turn -lanes. 6. A minor arterial with a median is recommended as the adopted cross-section with cuts in the median limited to shown street locations. 7. Show the following: a) Street cross sections of proposed streets at 100, stations. b) Street profiles showing existing and proposed centerlines. c) Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec. 31-175 and "MSP". d) Direction of flow for water courses leaving the property. 8. Contact the AHTD for work at Hwy. 300, Hwy. 10, within the State Highway right-of-way. 9. Driveways shall conform to Sec: 31-210 or Ordinance 16,577. E. UTILITIES• Wastewater: Outside service boundary - no comment. Entergy: Easements required. Arkla: OK as submitted. Southwestern Bell: OK as submitted. Water: This area is outside the City. Annexation or execution of a Preannexation Agreement will be required prior to service. A water main extension will be required. On site fire protection will be required on several sites. Fire Department: Show fire hydrant locations. LATA: Hwy. 10 express only - no all day service E October, 30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • A (Cont.) _ FILE NO.: S -200-D F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: No comment required. Issues: Planning Division: Complies with Land Use Plan - no change proposed. G. ANALYSIS• There is little to be said about the plat except that the various items noted by Staff should be added in order to bring the plat up to code. These are: 1. Need Bill of Assurance. 2. Water and sewer source 3. More detail in vicinity map 4. Lot dimensions 5. Show lot 1 recorded. 6. Building lines 7. Lot 10, zoning current 8. Show Hwy. 10 and 300 current ROW. 9. Dimension AP&L easement. 10. Remove proposed zoning label. 11. Need phase plan. 12. Contour internal. 13. Show abutting owners. 14. Show PAGIS locations. 15. Mete and bounds description of plat. 16. Show city limits if abutting. 17. Wrong preliminary survey certificate 18. Utility service will require annexation. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval of the plat subject to staff and Public Works Comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JULY 17,:1997) Mr. Joe White, Jr. was present representing the applicant. The Staff presented its comments and discussed the plat deficiencies with Mr. White and the Committee. It was suggested at one point that there are significant number of basic items missing that require refiling after correction. The Committee and Mr. White discussed how deferral could be avoided. Mr. White indicated that he could correct the filing deficiencies by Thursday the 24th if permitted to go forward. 3 October.30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S -200-D The Committee accepted his promise. The plat will be considered on August 7th only if he corrects the items noted. There was no serious discussion of specific points. STAFF UPDATE: (JULY 23, 1997) The staff received a letter from the applicant requesting a deferral of the plat until -September 18, 1997 in as much as Mr. Pfeifer will be out of town. More time to upgrade the drawing will be provided. Staff recommends the deferral. PLANNING COMMISSION_ ACTION: (AUGUST 7, 1997) The Staff reported that the owner has requested a deferral until September 18th agenda and that this item should be placed on Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion was made to place the item on Consent Deferral. A motion to approve the deferral of the plat passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 28, 1997) Staff reported that Mr. Pfeifer's agent, Mr. white, submitted a letter requesting deferral until October 30th. The letter was in order and time. This is the applicant's second deferral request, although staff recommended its deferral last meeting due to plat deficiencies. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 1997) The applicant submitted a written request for deferral. The request was in order as to submittal time. The staff -reported that the applicant is requesting his second deferral which means some action must be taken on the plat at the next meeting. After a brief discussion, the plat was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to October 30, 1997. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 9, 1997) Mr. Joe White was present for Mr. Pfeifer. He stated he would ask for street design variances. Staff offered its comments. There was"a discussion on adding more plat details. Mr. White 4 October -30, 1997 SUBDIVISION TEM NO.: A (Cont. FILE NO.: S -200-D said he understood staff comments and would respond by October 16 with an amended cover letter with variance and plat revisions. The Public Works comments are as indicated in the first report. The Committee accepted the revised plat with the changes promised. This plat is forwarded to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 1997) The Planning Staff reported, that there were no objectors, letters or calls on this issue. The Public Works staff has worked out an arrangement with the developer, Mr. Pfeifer, dealing with concerns they had previously outlined. Richard Wood, of the Staff, reported that there was a continuing issue that the Public Works Department needed to address. Mr. David Scherer, of Public Works, came forward to speak on the issue. Scherer identified the plat as being a multi -lot commercial office and multifamily development at the corner of two arterial streets being Hwy. 10 and the extension of Chenal. He stated that Public Works had concern with the extension of this street and a tie to Hwy. 300 and the developing commercial and other interest along this section of roadway. He stated, "with the requirements for left turn movements in association with the improvements at the Hwy. 10 and Chenal Intersection would cause or soon necessitate the installation of a traffic light at this intersection and staff recommends that this developer contribute 50% -of the cost of the installation of such a facility." Mr. Scherer followed this by saying the developer has suggested a 20% contribution. This is the remaining issue before the Commission. Commissioner Berry posed a question to Mr. Scherer on the total cost of such an installation. Scherer stated it would cost more than $100,000 dollars and this figure could vary with the circumstances. He said that Public Works was not asking for the contribution at this time. He stated the developer has asked for and received a deferral of such improvements. He stated. this traffic signal would be paid for at the time it is warranted by traffic counts and needs and approved by the Highway Department. Commissioner Rahman then posed a question as to who would pay for the other 50%. Mr. Scherer stated that would be a public cost and possibly shared by some of the development on the south side of the intersection. Jim Lawson of staff inserted a statement to the effect he assumed that when the other side of the intersection submitted a development plan that we would assess the same cost. Scherer 61 october,30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont..) FILE NO.: 5--200-D responded by saying yes they would assess such a benefit at that time. There was a lengthy discussion about percentage of contribution both on the north side developer and the south side. Also, as to the certain traffic movements along Hwy. 10 and on to the Chenal leg of the intersection being somewhat different. Mr. Scherer stated that the traffic generated from this developer meaning Mr. Pfeifer's project would be predominately left hand turning movements which are more significant and would typically require the traffic signal. Commissioner Rahman then raised the question of what the 50% was based upon. The response by Mr. Scherer was that Mr. Pfeifer's development was building half of the development at this intersection. The discussion then continued at length about the ratio of contribution. At this point the Chairman recognized Mr. Gene Pfeifer, the owner and developer of the project. After introducing himself, Mr. Pfeifer offered some comments concerning the traffic movements on Hwy. 10 and what he felt to be was the traffic flow in the area. He further described the highways and their relationship in the areas of the state that they serve and the amount of traffic that was contributed by each. He stated the development of his property was a small portion of the traffic through this intersection. He further stated that it would not be supportable for him to come to the Commission and state that he would contribute nothing to the intersection. He stated it is unfair that the property owners would have to bear the burden of the entire signalization. He is willing to pay 60% of whatever Deltic pays whenever they agree to pay it. He stated this would be deferring the issue of how much the property owners pay at all, then apportion it between the two owners based upon their respective commercial zonings. He said this is patently unfair that the City would pay half of the improvement and he being committed to pay the other 50%. At this point the Chairman recognized Commissioner Earnest. Commissioner Earnest stated there was an existing road that bears a specific amount of traffic and the only exercise in logic that he could see would be the increase to the total traffic that exist. Coming from the anticipated development, you might have some type of formula for coming up with an equitable cost. Mr. Pfeifer agreed with that statement and basically continued; his thought by saying if his project was not crossed by this arterial street and it were not a state highway, perhaps the type of construction he would have to place there would not have to be the same standard because it would not bear the same load. This would not even require a four or five lane roadway. He stated that he was not quarreling with the fact that it is a state development here. Mr. Pfeifer stated that he was agreeing to build this facility on a deferred basis and phased. In essence to have to build what is a state highway, and then provide for the traffic light does not seem fair. 0 October. 30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont. FILE NO.: 5-200-D Commissioner Daniel was then recognized for comment. He stated that he had just one problem with the commentary of Mr. Pfeifer. It had to do with an intersection further east on Chenal Parkway. Commissioner Daniel offered extensive commentary on how that - signal was located and paid for and the demands which were placed on various participants to erect a signal there. If the State Highway Department is not going to erect a signal at this intersection, then it would be the responsibility of the City. He felt the City could not do that at this point; therefore, it should fall to the adjacent developers as done further east on Chenal. At this point the Chairman recognized Commissioner Hawn for a statement. Commissioner Hawn stated he was not particularly impressed with the argument about what the people south of Hwy. 10 owed. He expanded his comments dealing with the turning movements on Hwy. 10 and asked for a response from Mr. Pfeifer. He stated that the turning movements were something not generated by the people south of Hwy. 10 but by the movements coming from the north and west. Mr. Pfeifer stated that in the absence of a signal at this intersection and the shortcut his development would propose. A signal would have to be erected at the existing intersection to the west at Hwy. 300. Mr. Pfeifer then said this corner at the existing 300 intersection is a perfect example of putting 25% on each of the four corners is arbitrary. He stated that currently the northwest corner of this intersection is a lake and to assess a $25,000 contribution on a property such as this is an unfair way of doing it. Commissioner Hawn then asked Mr. Pfeifer if he knew what the current accident rate was at this intersection. Mr. Pfeifer stated that he had no idea. The Chairman then recognized Commissioner Adcock. She asked for other examples within the City where significant contributions to signalization have occurred where the developer had to pay for putting up the signals. Mr. Scherer. of Public works, first off responded to a first question that was a hangover from the previous comment. He stated that he did not know what the: current traffic accident rate was at Hwy. 300 and Hwy. 10 intersection. Mr. Scherer then offered an extensive commentary on infrastructure needs throughout the city. He stated the contribution was not required at this time but in concert with the development as it occurred. Commissioner Earnest then inserted a comment that he was still trying to understand the rationale behind the 50% contribution. He stated he wanted to know where the 50% and the 20% came from. VA Octsober.30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S -200-D Scherer stated that the 50% came from the fact that Mr. Pfeifer owned 2 of the 4 corners of this intersection. Additional discussion occurred involving Mr. Scherer, the Chairman and others. Concerning the Autumn Road intersection and contributions offered there. The discussion about the rationale behind this contribution continued extensively. At the end of discussion the Chairman regained control of the meeting. A comment was made that the city should accept the 20% that is offered. A motion was then discussed concerning accepting Mr. Pfeifer's application with the requested phasing and the 20% contribution for traffic signal as offered if it is ever constructed at this location. A motion to that effect was made and seconded. A vote on the motion produced 6 ayes, 4 nays and 1 absent. The application is approved. 8 - October �1, 2002 ITEM NO.: 11 NAME: Wal-Mart Site Plan Review FILE NO.: Z -5097-C LOCATION: Southeast Corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 2001 S.E. 10th Street Bentonville, AR 72716-0550 AREA: 28.4 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 (7.84 acres subject to site plan review) CURRENT ZONING: C-3 ALLOWED USES: General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3 ENGINEER: Carlson Consulting Engineers 7731 Highway 70, Suite 210 Bartlett, TN 38133 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Retail — Wal-Mart Supercenter VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1988, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 15,603, which rezoned several tracts of land as a part of the Deltic Master Plan from Residential zoning to various multi -family, office and commercial zoning districts. That action rezoned 7.860 acres located at the southeast corner of Highway 10 and Chenal October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Parkway from R-2 to C-3. The approval of the C-3 zoning was conditioned upon a site plan review, by the Planning Commission, prior to development and a provision of a 40 - foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. Ordinance No. 16,459 rezoned additional properties contained within the proposed Wal- Mart site. The Ordinance was approved by the Board of Directors on July 20, 1993, and rezoned 8.7051 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. Ordinance No. 18,628, adopted by the Board of Directors on January 2, 2002, rezoned an additional 10.92 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. This area was to the south of the C-3 zoned property and adjacent to Chenal Parkway. At the time of rezoning the applicant also requested and was approved rezoning further south. The zoning approved was 0-2 on 10+ acres adjacent to the Parkway and 10+ acres of OS zoning nearer the single-family neighborhood to the east. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: As a condition of the 1988 zoning, approximately six (6) acres of this site is subject to site plan review. The applicant intends to develop the 28.4 acres as a 210,396 square foot Wal-Mart Supercenter, associated parking and service areas. The parking lot consists of 988 parking spaces, including 24 handicap accessible parking spaces. Two driveways will provide access to the proposed project from Cantrell Road and two driveways from Chenal Parkway. The southernmost driveway on Chenal Parkway will be aligned opposite the existing Northfield Drive and is proposed to be signalized. This drive will be a shared drive with the currently undeveloped property to the south (zoned 0-2), thus helping to limit future access points on the Parkway. Improvements will be provided on Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road as coordinated with the City of Little Rock. The development will be buffered from surrounding developments by the required landscape buffer areas and internal landscaping. Additionally, the stormwater detention area is proposed to be located to the east of the building within the existing Entergy easement. The addition of low height landscaping within this presently clear-cut area will provide a visual enhancement to the Highway 10 Corridor. The placement of this landscaping will provide a significant buffer to those properties lying to the east of the development. Additionally, the OS zoned area to the south of the property will provide a substantial buffer immediately south of the proposed Wal-Mart building. By orienting the building to face Chenal Parkway, the building has been located at the furthest possible distance from those properties to the west and southwest of the development. 2 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: FILE NO.: Z -5097-C The site is a vacant, heavily wooded site. Chenal Parkway, in this area, is a two lane road and Cantrell Road is a four lane road with a center turn lane at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. Other uses in the area include a Quick Stop Service Station on the northwest corner and mini -warehouses on the northeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. The southwest corner is zoned C-3, General Commercial and is currently undeveloped. There is an Entergy easement along the east property line with a church located further to the east of the site. Vacant 0-2 zoned property is located to the south of the site with OS zoned property located between the office zoning and the single-family residential located further south and east of the proposed development. South and west of the proposed development are also single-family residences adjoining vacant 0-2 and C-2 zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writings Staff has received numerous phone calls in opposition to the proposed development. Staff has also received several phone calls in support of the proposed development. The Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association and the DuQuesne Place Property Owners Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway are classified on the Master Street Plan as principal arterials. A minimum dedication of right-of-way to 55 -feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of the streets conforming to Master Street pan. Construct one- half street improvements to these streets, including 5 -foot sidewalk, with planned development. 3. Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standard. 4. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 5. Plans of all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 3 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C 6. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required Section 29-186(e). Also provide critical cross sections through the site that demonstrate compliance with the cut and fill requirements of the land alteration ordinance. 7. Grading permits are required prior to construction. 8. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Provide easements for detention. 9. An NPDES permit will be required for this project. Contact the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality for approval prior to the start of work. 10. Provide the direction of flow and all stormwater flows (Q) entering and leaving the site. 11. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 12. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping, Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 13.Obtain permits (barricade/street cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in the right-of- way. 14.Obtain permits for improvements within the State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. ARKLA: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water: It is recommended that water service be taken off the 16 -inch water main on the east side of Chenal Parkway. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 to discuss this option. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: At this time the site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. However, CATA would like to have bus access on this site similar to the Wal-Mart on Bowman Road. 4 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. FILE NO.: Z -5097-C City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The site is located in an area that is not currently covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan. Landscape Issues: The width of the proposed perimeter landscape strip north of the proposed drive -way, which leads to Chenal Parkway, drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and the nine (9) feet required by the Landscape Ordinance. Additionally, the width of the proposed northwestern perimeter landscape strip drops below the twenty-five (25) feet required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed northeastern parking lot needs additional interior landscaping. Interior landscape islands must be at least three hundred (300) square feet in area. Interior islands adjacent to the area marked "future development area" need to be increased to at least three hundred (300) square feet in area and be designated for interior landscaping in order to help distribute interior trees throughout the parking area. The fifty (50) foot wide existing Entergy easement must be legally abandoned in order to count toward fulfilling land use buffer requirements. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plants are required along the eastern perimeter on the site. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year -around screening requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is required. Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide an approved Landscape Plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible on this tree -covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance and Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 Building Codes: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: FILE NO.: Z -5097-C (October 10, 2002) Mr. Dean Carlson and Mr. Joseph Parsley of Carlson Consulting Engineers were present representing the application. Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, presented the parameters of the site plan review. He stated 7 acres were previously subject to site plan review. He stated 2 acres of the 7 were not a part of the Wal-Mart development. He stated the review was a technical review and if the applicant met the requirements of the ordinance, the development should be approved. Staff then presented the site plan to the Committee and requested additional information be shown on the site plan. Staff stated the parking was more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking requirement. Staff requested the applicant indicate a cross access easement to Lot 1 of Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision. Public Works requested cross sections and grading plans. Staff stated the site was a rather large site and cross sections would be necessary to determine the need for variances from the Land Alteration Ordinance. Staff questioned the detention location. Staff stated they would require in writing approval from Entergy for placement of the detention under the power lines. Staff stated this was not a common practice and verification would ease any future concerns. Additional landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant must follow through with the formal abandonment (or have a long term binding agreement) of the portion of the easement desired to serve as the land use buffer and allow the easement to serve as the required buffering. There was discussion concerning the traffic light at Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway. Staff stated the traffic light would be paid for by the developers. Staff stated Deltic would contribute 50% of the cost, Northwest Territory would pay 20% and Wal-Mart would pay the remaining 30%. There was a question as to if the Bowman store would be closed as a result of the development. Mr. Carlson stated it would not. He stated the new store was a supercenter where the Bowman store was only a retail center. Staff questioned if there would be any outside storage. The applicant indicated there would not. He stated the Chenal Design Review Committee had indicated there was to be no outdoor storage, display or sales of merchandise and the store would have an expanded stock room and garden center to accommodate the seasonal items. 2 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z -5097-C There being no further issues for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to Staff addressing most of the issues raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided a copy of the lease agreement between Entergy and the applicant indicating the use of the eastern fifty feet of the Entergy right-of-way. The agreement states vegetation growth may not exceed 12 -feet in height and that Entergy and its successors will not cut any trees, plants or natural vegetative growth within the Green Belt Buffer if such would result in the buffer not being in compliance with the applicable buffer ordinance of the City of Little Rock. The applicant has also indicated interior islands of the parking area will conform to the three hundred (300) square feet area requirement. The applicant has indicated a twenty-five (25) foot landscape strip along the area north of the proposed driveway (from Chenal Parkway). The applicant has also indicated access will be provided to the previously platted lot (Lot 1 Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision). Due to the terrain in the area the exact access location has not been determined but as requested by Staff the applicant has agreed this access will be provided when a suitable location is determined and agreed to by Staff and both property owners. (� The applicant is proposing two ground -mounted signs. One is to be located at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive the second near the primary drive from Cantrell Road. The sign proposed for Northfield Drive is proposed at forty (40) square feet in area, well within the Chenal Overlay District requirements for signage (maximum of eight (8) feet in height and one hundred Vj (100) square feet in area). The sign proposed along Cantrell Road is proposed at six (6) feet in height and seventy-two (72) square feet in area; complying with the highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. Site lighting has been addressed. The applicant has indicated site lighting will be provided by 1000 waft metal halide fixtures on 40 -foot black steel poles. The applicant states fixtures shall contain all horizontal bulbs with flat lenses to control glare and over spill of lighting. The site plan states lights will be directed away from adjoining properties and no floodlights will be used. The applicant has indicated 988 parking spaces as part of the development. The typical minimum parking required would be 701 spaces. The proposed parking is 7 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5097-C more than sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking required by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has indicated all comments provided by Public Works will be adhered to. The applicant has contracted with a traffic engineer to determine what road improvements will be required as a part of the development. This information is not available at this time and will be forthcoming to the Commission at the October 31 st Public Hearing. The applicant and the property owner of Lot 1 Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision have agreed to allow the internal driveway to act as an internal street to route motorists to the traffic light at Chenal Parkway and Northfield Drive. This will remove the need for a median break (previously approved Ordinance No, 17,870) allowing left turns onto Chenal Parkway. Previous preliminary plat approvals have secured the funding for a portion of the traffic signal at Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. Deltic has agreed to pay 50% of the cost (S-867-NNN - Chenal Valley Phase II Commercial Subdivision Preliminary Plat - November 1998) and Pfeifer Development Company will fund 20% of the cost (S -200-D - Northwest Territory Preliminary Plat - October 1997). The applicant has agreed to contribute the remaining 30% of the cost as a part of this development. The landscaping, building setbacks and signage conform to all provisions of the Chenal Overlay District and the Highway 10 Overlay District. Otherwise, to Staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed site plan review. Staff is supportive of the proposed site plan and feels the applicant has met the intent of the ordinance with regard to setbacks, buffer requirements, landscaping requirements, parking ratios and all other technical aspects of the ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the site plan review subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 2002) Mr. Dean Carlson and Mr. Ernie Peters were present representing the application. There were objectors present. Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, detailed the Commission's role in the site plan review. Staff presented the proposed development along with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated the development was to be an entirely closed development with on outside sales of seasonal items or storage container for excess inventory. 8 October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Mr. Dean Carlson of Carlson Consulting Engineers detailed the project to the Commission. He stated the development would be required to appear before the Chenal Valley Design Review Committee prior to construction. He stated detailed building elevations were not available since Wal-Mart and the DRC had not reached an agreement with regard to building materials. Mr. Ernie Peters presented the traffic study to the Commission indicating the level of service at the primary intersections during peek hours would not be reduced but would in fact be enhanced. Mr. Peters stated there were basic assumptions made when the traffic model was presented. One of which was that 40 percent of the traffic would be from the east, 20 percent would be from the west, 5 percent from the north, 2 percent from Northfield and 33 percent from the south. He stated the infrastructure would be in place prior to the opening of the store. Mr. Carlson stated Wal-Mart was agreeable to the request of Central Arkansas Transit. He stated the store would install a bus shelter and the required curb radius as requested. Mr. Mark Wright spoke on behalf of the property owners of Lot 1. He stated the property owners of Lot 1 had been working with Wal-Mart to ensure clear access to the separate lot and not allow the traffic from Lot 1 and Wal-Mart to be conflicting. He requested prior to a building permit being issued that an agreement between the two (2) property owners be executed and duly filed. Mr. Chris Palmer spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated the current proposal allowed for seven (7) lanes of traffic to be dumped into a two (2) lane roadway. He also stated with the proposed lighting there would be a tremendous overspill of lighting to neighboring properties. He requested the developer install 30 -foot poles as opposed to 40 -foot poles and reduce the wattage of bulbs to 400 watts. Mr. Palmer requested the Commission not approve the site plan until a building design had been presented. Mr. Sharp Malak spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated he had concerns with the environmental impacts of the proposed development. He stated 6000 cars per day was not as likely to cause health problems as 20,000 to 30,000 cars per day. Mr. Malak stated he had stood at the entrance to the Aberdeen Subdivision on Saturday and within one and one-half hours had received the signatures of twenty-five percent of the homeowners in opposition of the proposed development. Ms. Alicia Finch, President of Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated traffic on Highway 10 was severely congested and the addition of a Supercenter would only add to the traffic October 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION EM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5097-C congestion. She stated the site was a part of the watershed for Pinnacle Mountain. She questioned the use of a utility easement as a detention basin was an acceptable practice. Ms. Finch stated the development would be approved. She stated the concern of the residents was the non-involvement. She stated the residents should be allowed to be involved in the design process to ensure a compatible architectural style. Mr. Brent Sawrie spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated his opposition was to the increased traffic flow into a Supercenter store. He stated the traffic projections indicated 20 percent of the traffic from the west. He questioned this assumptions stating Perry County was the least populated county in the state. Mr. Tom Draper spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He presented the Commission with a petition from the property owners opposed to the development. He presented a history of the rezoning of the property to the south of the site indicating Staff had stated there was sufficient commercially zoned property in the area only to change their recommendation six weeks later when the applicant increased the acreage of the proposed rezoning and added office and open space zoning classifications to the request. He questioned when Chenal Parkway would be expanded to a four (4) lane roadway.- Ms. oadway: Ms. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, spoke of the proposed development citing scale as the reason for opposition. She stated proposed development was a regional development and would impact the region not just the neighborhoods around the site. She stated the proposed parking was 100+ spaces more than was required by the typical minimum parking requirements and questioned if the applicant would consider reducing the number of spaces. She stated the proposed development did not appear to be something that would fit but was just a big development. Mr. Kevin Sebrowski spoke in opposition to the proposed development. He stated he was not opposed to commercial development but to the proposed project. He stated the proposed development did not fit into the neighborhood. He stated the Wal-Mart store on Bowman was not in close proximity to a residential neighborhood like the proposed development on Chenal and Highway 10. Mr. Chris Stuart spoke in opposition to the proposed development. He stated he and his wife purchase their home to escape the urban sprawl of Little Rock. He quoted from the Chenal brochures stating this type development was not a part of their Master Plan as presented to homeowners. He stated with the development of a Wal-Mart on the site property values would be severely impacted and residents would be trying to escape. 10 October, 31, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5097-C Staff addressed the topic of detention. Staff stated the use of easements for detention was a common practice in the city. Staff stated the city did not have criteria in place for the location of detention under power lines and the applicant had indicated all city ordinances would be adhere to and met. Staff stated Chenal Parkway would be -widened to a four (4) lane roadway at the point when the traffic counts reached 12,000 cars per day. Staff stated the counts were very close currently and the proposed development would more than likely trigger the street improvements. Staff stated the proposed design was not new but was in fact the Master Street Plan requirements which had been put in place many years ago. There was a general discussion concerning access points, street improvements and site lighting. The applicant agreed to amend the application to include 30 -foot poles with 400 watt bulbs. A motion was made to approve the proposed development as filed to include all Staff recommendations and comments. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no and 2 absent. 11