Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5896-A Staff AnalysisJune 27, 1995 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.- Z 896-A NAME:, _-NATIONAL HOMECARE VILLAGES, *INC. -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED DISTRICT -RESIDENTIAL LOCATION: In the Pankey Community, between Black St. and Wells St., south of Piggee St., approximately, 0.20 mile south of Cantrell Rd. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Willard Proctor, WILLARD PROCTOR, 1619 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 378-7720 AREA: 2 ACRES Jr., Agent Charles E. Miller JR. ATTORNEY CHARLIE MILLER ENGINEERING 1500 Aldersgate Rd. 72206 Little Rock, AR 72205 225-7106 NTKBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 450 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Multi-Family/Elderly Housing PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUEST : Approval of a waiver of the requirement to dedicate additional right-of-way for and to construct boundary streets along the south and east boundaries of the tract, and along the east one-half of the north boundary of the tract. BACKGROUND: The item was previously submitted as a re -zoning request, in which the appellant had requested a rezoning from R-2 to R-5. At the May 30, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, however, the applicant agreed to modify the rezoning to a planned development request. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to develop the 2 acre tract for elderly housing. The facility is to be housed in an "L"-shaped, two- story building containing a total of 56 apartments. Of the 56 total units, 20 are to be efficiency apartments, 35 are to be one bedroom units, and one unit is to be a two bedroom unit which is to be the residence of the manager. The building is to include a library, a recreation room, an exercise facility, a medical exam facility, a manager's and support staff offices, a dining room, and a kitchen facility. On -site parking for 32 vehicles is June 27, 1995 S BDIVISIQN ITEM NQ : C(Cont .) FILE Z-5896-A proposed. One-half street improvements to Black St. (the west boundary street) and to the west 15-0 feet of Piggee St. the north boundary street) are proposed, as is improvement to the existing wooden bridge located approximately 800 feet north of the site on Black St. A waiver of the requirement to improve the remaining boundary streets (the west and south boundary streets, and the east one-half north boundary street) is requested. Landscaping as required by the Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is to be provided. A. PROPQSALIRRQQEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for a planned development for an elderly housing facility, and for a wavier of the boundary street requirements for two of the boundary streets (along the east and south boundaries of the site) and for the east 150 feet of a third boundary street (the north boundary street). The applicant proposes to construct a bridge to Master Street Plan standards to replace the existing wooden bridge structure on Black St., the bridge being located approximately 800 feet north of the site. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are two single-family homes located along the northern -most edge of the site, but, for the most part, the site is undeveloped. Thick woods cover the southern and eastern areas of the tract. There is a significant differential in ground elevation across the site, with an approximate 60 foot drop from the northwest corner of the tract to the southeast corner. The boundary streets along all four sides of the tract are either totally undeveloped or are substandard. Access to the site is from the northwest corner of the block, where Black St. dead -ends into the tract. Black St. along the western boundary of the site is undeveloped. Piggee St. is a "trail" to the eastern -most residence on the block, but for the remainder of the northern boundary of the site, Piggee St. is undeveloped. Wells St. and Douglas St. are only dedicated rights -of -way along the eastern and southern boundaries, respectively, of the site; they are totally undeveloped. The existing zoning of the site is R-2. All surrounding land is zoned R-2. There are existing homes on the site, as well as on lots across Piggee St. to the north and on Wells St. to the east. There is a new single-family neighborhood being developed to the west, with a number of developed lots backing up to the subject site. 2 June 27, 1995 ITEM NO,: C Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5896-A C. ' ENGINEEAINGIUTILITY COMMENTS: The Public Works staff notes the following: 1) Black St. is designated as a collector street on the Master Street Plan; the other boundary streets are designated as standard residential streets. Construction of half street improvements to Master Street Plan standards (one-half of a 36 foot roadway for Black St. and one-half of a 27 foot roadway for the other three boundary streets), including construction of sidewalks, are required by the ordinance. Dedication of additional right-of-way to meet Master Street Plan standards is required: 10 additional feet along Black St. and 5 additional feet along the other three boundary streets. A minimum 20 foot radial dedication at intersections is required. The existing wooden bridge on Black St., located approximately 800 feet north of the applicant's site, and approximately 250 feet south of Cantrell Rd., is substandard, and cannot support the weight of emergency vehicles or construction -laden trucks. Access to the site, then, is severely limited, and off -site improvements to the bridge must be made in order for the development to have proper access. Public Works can support the waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for the east and south boundary streets, as well as the east one-half of the north boundary street, as long as the applicant agrees to meet the City Engineer's requirements for street improvements along both the Black St. boundary street and the Piggee St. boundary from Black St. eastward approximately 150 feet, as well as agreeing to re -construct the Black St. bridge to a standard required by the City Engineer. 2) There is a platted north -south alley shown on the original Pankey Subdivision plat. For the project, as presented, to proceed, the alley must be abandoned, with no Easements retained. 3) The northern -most driveway on Black St. is too close to the intersection. The Master Street Plan requires that driveway entrances be no closer to intersections than 100 feet. It is recommended that a variance of this standard be pursued by the applicant to permit the driveway to be located 50 feet from the intersection. 4) Driveways must be shown to be 20 feet in width, minimum, and must be designated as "one-way". 3 June 27, 1995 i _ OR ITEM(Cont.FILE Z- - �). The drive approach off Piggee St. does not conform to the Master Street Plan standards. It must be modified to permit maneuvering off-street and to permit trucks to unload without backing onto or blocking the street. 6) An excavation permit must be obtained prior to any construction activity. 7) A stormwater detention analysis is required. The analysis for drainage must address the off -site capacity of existing drainage, as required by the ordinance. All street drainage is to be underground, conforming to City standards. Water Works comments that on -site fire protection will be required. The Fire Department comments that the drive-thru shall be designated a fire lane, and must be a minimum of 20' in width. On -site fire hydrants may be required. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. D. IS$UES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Sec. 31-201.h states that: "Whenever a proposed (development) abuts a partially dedicated or constructed... street, the developer shall provide the minimum of one-half of the required improvements and right- of-way. The portion of the boundary streets on the half of the right-of-way abutting the applicant's site are, pursuant to the Code, to be constructed to Master Street Plan standards, with the required right-of-way dedicated. If this is not proposed to be done, then, waivers of this requirement must be approved by the Board of Directors. The applicant, as a response to this requirement, is seeking a waiver of these requirements for the east, south, and a portion of the north boundary streets. Dedication of the required right-of-way and construction of the street improvements, to standards imposed by the City Engineer, are proposed for the west and a portion of the north boundary street, as is construction of a new bridge to replace a sub- standard bridge off -site on Black St. The site plan is to show sidewalks, landscaping, and buffering. The Code requires, in Sec. 36-502.1, that, for elderly housing, 0.5 parking spaces be provided per unit. This development proposes 55 elderly housing units and 1 4 June 27, 1995 BDIVI I ITEM(Cont.)FILE Z- -A apartment for the manager. The required parking, then, would be 27.5 spaces for the elderly housing, plus 1.5 spaces for the standard multi -family unit, or, a total of 29 spaces. The applicant proposes 32 spaces. The Neighborhoods and Planning Site Plan Review Specialist comments that the buffer width requirement along Black St. is 14.5' (9.5' average with transfer). At no point should the buffer drop below 61; the Landscape Ordinance requires 6' minimum. No buffering has been shown on the submitted plan between the proposed parking lot and the right-of-way of Black St. The Planning staff point out that the proposed project is in the River Mountain planning district, and that the adopted Land Use Plan calls for this and the surrounding areas to be developed for single-family uses. The multi-family/elderly housing use which is proposed is in conflict with the adopted plan. E. ANALYSIS: The Public Works staff points out that the northern -most driveway onto Black St. is too close to the intersection, and recommends that a variance be requested by the applicant to permit the driveway to be 50 feet from the intersection, in lieu of 100 feet as required by the Ordinance. A variance for this deviation from Ordinance standards has not been requested by the applicant. Either the site plan must show the relocation of the driveway to a point not closer than 100 feet from the intersection, or a variance must be requested. The development involves construction of a 2-story "L"- shaped, multi -family building. The adopted Land Use Plan calls for the area to be developed in single-family uses. The multi -family character of the proposed development does not conform to the adopted plan. It is incompatible with the planned single-family development character of the surrounding area and with the single-family residential subdivision which is developing to the west F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 8, 1995) Mr. Willard Proctor, the agent for the developer, was present. Staff outlined the request and reviewed with the Committee members and applicant the comments contained in the discussion 5 June 27, 1995 a:a ITEM N n FILE 4.: outline. Mr. Proctor indicated that he would prepare and submit the needed information, and that the site plan would be revised to conform to the Public Works requirements. The Committee forwarded the item to the Commission for the public hearing. 6 FILE Z- 5 -A NAME: NATIONAL HOMECARE VILLAGES, INC. -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED DISTRICT -RESIDENTIAL LOCATION: In the Pankey Community, between Black St. and Wells St., south of Piggee St., approximately 0.20 mile south of Cantrell Rd. DEVELOPER: Willard Proctor, WILLARD PROCTOR, 1619 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 378-7720 AREA- 2 ACRES ZONING: R-2 ENGINEER- Jr., Agent Charles E. Miller JR. ATTORNEy CHARLIE MILLER ENGINEERING 1500 Aldersgate Rd. 72206 Little Rock, AR 72205 225-7106 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 450 PROPOSED USES: Multi-Family/Elderly Housing PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES RE TESTED: Approval of a waiver of the requirement to dedicate additional right-of-way for and to construct boundary streets along the south and east boundaries of the tract, and along the east one-half of the north boundary of the tract. BACKGROUND: The item was previously submitted as a re -zoning request, in which the appellant had requested a rezoning from R-2 to R-5. At the May 30, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, however, the applicant agreed to modify the rezoning to a planned development request. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to develop the 2 acre tract for elderly housing. The facility is to be housed in an °L°'-shaped, two- story building containing a total of 56 apartments. Of the 56 total units, 20 are to be efficiency apartments, 35 are to be one bedroom units, and one unit is to be a two bedroom unit which is to be the residence of the manager. The building is to include a library, a recreation room, an exercise facility, a medical exam facility, a manager's and support staff offices, a dining room, and a kitchen facility. On -site parking for 32 vehicles is Proposed. One-half street ,improvements to Black St. {the west boundary street} and to the west 150 feet of Piggee St. the north boundary street} are proposed, as is improvement to the existing wooden bridge located approximately 800 feet north of the site on Black St. A waiver of the requirement to improve the remaining boundary streets (the west and south bounds east one-half north bounds rY streets, and the s requested. L as required by the Landscape andBufferOrdinances isatosbeping provided. A. PROP SAL RE QEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for a planned development for an elderly housing facility, and for a wavier of the boundary street requirements for two of the bounds the east and south boundaries of the site) andrfor stheleast 150 feet of a third boundary street (the north boundary street). The applicant proposes to construct a bridge to Master Street Plan standards to replace the existing wooden bridge stricture on Black St., the bridge being located approximately 800 feet north of the site. B. EXISTING CDNDITTDNS: There are two single-family homes located along the northern -most edge of the site, but, for the most part, the site is undeveloped. Thick woods cover the southern and eastern areas of the tract. There is a sin ificant differential in ground elevation across the site, with an approximate 60 foot drop from the northwest corner of the tract to the southeast corner. The boundary streets along all four sides of the tract are either totally undeveloped or are substandard. Access to the site is from the northwest corner of the block, where Black St. dead -ends into the tract. Black S it. long western boundary of the site is undeveloped. Piggee the St. a "trail" to the eastern -most residence on the block,butls for the remainder of the northern bounder ry of the si, Piggee St. is undeveloped. only dedicated rights Wells St. and Douglas Stteare -of-way along the eastern and southern boundaries, respectively, of the site; they are totally undeveloped. The existing zoning of the site is R-2. All surrounding land is zoned R-2. There are existing homes on the site, as well as on lots across Piggee St. to the north and on Wells St- to the east. There is a new single-family neighborhood being developed to the west, with a number of developed lots backing up to the subject site. C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: The Public Works staff notes the following: 1) Black St. is designated as a collector street on the Master Street Plan; the other boundary streets are designated as standard residential streets. 2 FILE NO,: Z-5896-A (Cont.) Construction of half street improvements to Master Street Plan standards (one-half of a 36 foot roadway for Black St. and one-half of a 27 foot roadway for the other three boundary streets), including construction of sidewalks, are required by the Ordinance. Dedication of additional right-of-way to meet Master Street Plan standards is required: 10 additional feet along Black St. and 5 additional feet along the other three boundary streets. A minimum 20 foot radial dedication at intersections is required. The existing wooden bridge on Black St., located approximately 800 feet north of the applicant's site, and approximately 250 feet south of Cantrell Rd., is substandard, and cannot support the weight of emergency vehicles or construction -laden trucks. Access to the site, then, is severely limited, and off -site improvements to the bridge must be made in order for the development to have proper access. Public Works can support the waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for the east and south boundary streets, as well as the east one-half of the north boundary street, as long as the applicant agrees to meet the City Engineer's requirements for street improvements along both the Black St. boundary street and the Piggee St. boundary from Black St. eastward approximately 150 feet, as well as agreeing to re -construct the Black St. bridge to a standard required by the City Engineer. 2) There is a platted north -south alley shown on the original Pankey Subdivision plat. For the project, as presented, to proceed, the alley must be abandoned, with no easements retained. 3) The northern -most driveway on Black St. is too close to the intersection. The Master Street Plan requires that driveway entrances be no closer to intersections than 100 feet. It is recommended that a variance of this standard be pursued by the applicant to permit the driveway to be located 50 feet from the intersection. 4) Driveways must be shown to be 20 feet in width, minimum, and must be designated as "one-way". 5) The drive approach off Piggee St. does not conform to the Master Street Plan standards. It must be modified to permit maneuvering off-street and to permit trucks to unload without backing onto or blocking the street. 6) An excavation permit must be obtained prior to any construction activity. 3 FILE N Z-5896-A (font.) _- 7) A stormwater detention analysis is required. The analysis for drainage must address the off -site capacity of existing drainage, as required by the ordinance. All street drainage is to be underground, conforming to City standards. Water Works comments that on -site fire protection will be required. The Fire Department comments that the drive-thru shall be designated a fire lane, and must be a minimum of 20' in width. On -site fire hydrants may be required. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. D . ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHHIgAL1_DESIGN : Sec. 31-201.h states that: "Whenever a proposed (development) abuts a partially dedicated or constructed... street, the developer shall provide the minimum of one-half of the required improvements and right- of-way. The portion of the boundary streets on the half of the right-of-way abutting the applicant's site are, pursuant to the Code, to be constructed to Master Street Plan standards, with the required right-of-way dedicated. If this is not proposed to be done, then, waivers of this requirement must be approved by the Board of Directors. The applicant, as a response to this requirement, is seeking a waiver of these requirements for the east, south, and a portion of the north boundary streets. Dedication of the required right-of-way and construction of the street improvements, to standards imposed by the City Engineer, are proposed for the west and a portion of the north boundary street, as is construction of a new bridge to replace a sub- standard bridge off -site on Black St. The site plan is to show sidewalks, landscaping, and buffering. The Code requires, in Sec. 36-502.1, that, for elderly housing, 0.5 parking spaces be provided per unit. This development proposes 55 elderly housing units and 1 apartment for the manager. The required parking, then, would be 27.5 spaces for the elderly housing, plus 1.5 spaces for the standard multi -family unit, or, a total of 29 spaces. The applicant proposes 32 spaces. The Neighborhoods and Planning Site Plan Review Specialist comments that the buffer width requirement along Black St. is 14.5' (9.5' average with transfer). At no point should the buffer drop below 61; the Landscape Ordinance requires 6' minimum. No buffering has been shown on the submitted plan between the proposed parking lot and the right-of-way of Black St. 4 FILE N Z- -A n The Planning staff point out that the proposed project is in the River Mountain planning district, and that the adopted Land Use Plan calls for this and the surrounding areas to be developed for single-family uses. The multi-family/elderly housing use which is proposed is in conflict with the adopted plan. E. ANALYSIS• The Public Works staff points out that the northern -most driveway onto Black St. is too close to the intersection, and recommends that a variance be requested by the applicant to permit the driveway to be 50 feet from the intersection, in lieu of 100 feet as required by the Ordinance. A variance for this deviation from Ordinance standards has not been requested by the applicant. Either the site plan must show the relocation of the driveway to a point not closer than 100 feet from the intersection, or a variance must be requested. The development involves construction of a 2-story "L"- shaped, multi -family building. The adopted Land Use Plan calls for the area to be developed in single-family uses. The multi -family character of the proposed development does not conform to the adopted plan. It is incompatible with the planned single-family development character of the surrounding area and with the single-family residential subdivision which is developing to the west F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 8, 1995) Mr. Willard Proctor, the agent for the developer, was present. Staff outlined the request and reviewed with the Committee members and applicant the comments contained in the discussion outline. Mr. Proctor indicated that he would prepare and submit the needed information, and that the site plan would be revised to conform to the Public Works requirements. The Committee forwarded the item to the Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 27, 1995) Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, offered the staff recommendation, a brief history of the application and an update on the filing. The Chairman then identified for the record that there was only one card of a person present wishing to speak on this matter. This was a person speaking in favor of the petition. The applicant, Willard Proctor, then came forward. 5 FILE Z- -A n Mr. Proctor offered a lengthy history of his application and began presenting this proposal with the several variances that are requested. He pointed out the site plan that is being reviewed does not contain some of the amendments he desires to make at this time. Mr. Proctor clarified for the record that this is not a nursing home but a retirement center, apartments if you will. He stated that the variances he was requesting are as follows: 1. The requirement of dedication of right-of-way along Black Road adjacent to the site on the west. He stated the only streets that they wanted to develop would be Black Road along the west side in approximately 1/2 the length of Piggee Street on the north boundary. At this point he also indicated that the Public Works Department had made a requirement that he improve the bridge across Isom Creek, which lies approximately one block north this development. This would be done in order to accommodate access by emergency vehicles. It is currently a poor standard, wooden structure. 2. The second variance would be from the requirement that he improve the other two boundary streets on this block that being the east line and the south line. In response to a question from a commissioner, Mr. Proctor pointed out that he did have an agreement with Public Works on the construction of the bridge and for reduction of certain standards on abutting streets. 3. The next item or exception he pointed out was the driveway distance from the corner. He desired to have less than the required 100 feet. He then moved his comments to the issue of amendments to the application. The first of these being the planting of a 6 foot minimum width strip around the perimeter as a screening and buffering device. The next change indicated that he is proceeding with an application to abandon the alley that runs north and south through this block. It will be required prior to final platting or obtaining building permits. The next item of change on the plan would be the modification of the turning radius on Piggee Street entrance to accommodate truck access since -this is the service entry. Mr. Proctor then moved his comments to the staff recommendation of denial. He pointed out that the staff's primary objection was based upon the adopted land use plan for the area which indicated single family and that his project is obviously multifamily. In defense of his position and his application, he offered that people who come here come to live here -- not like apartments. Proctor indicated that their facilities would be on -site such as dining and meeting rooms. Some transportation off -site may be r FILE NO:: Z- -A n offered, they would also have their personal and recreational needs cared for on the premises. He pointed that the design of his structure would compliment the neighborhood. He stated that the existing zoning would lead to the construction of low cost housing in the area. His project would perhaps be more compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Proctor then offered to receive comments or questions. The first of these came from Commissioner Willis who asked how he arrived at the unit count. His response generally was that he felt this number could be accommodated by the neighborhood and the size of property. He also indicated that it was similar to what other areas could accommodate and contain. Commissioner Adcock asked for an explanation of his term "efficiency apartment." He indicated that his efficiency units would not have a kitchen, but that these units would be served by central dining facilities. He was also questioned as to the character of the medical on -site facility. He indicated this was nothing more than a mini-doctor's office since most of the occupants would be elderly. Commissioner Adcock then raised a question as to whether or not the building was handicap accessible, the appropriate heights for cabinets, doorway passage, hallways and such. Mr. Proctor's response was that the building was designed for the elderly. There will be units provided with special design but this would be primarily ambulatory residents. In response to several questions from the Commission, Mr. Proctor went on record as saying, He would commit to certain minimum percentages of these units being for the elderly and they would not be open for rental for younger persons. At this point, Commissioner Daniels pointed out his objection to this would be the reduction of the street right-of-way to less than what would be required. Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, inserted a comment at this point that he felt the Public Works Department needed to insert their thoughts into the record. David Scherer, of the Public Works Engineering section, presented Public Works' position on this matter. He stated this was basically an undeveloped area with limited or poor access over narrow streets with wooden bridges. He pointed out specifically, that, what Public Works would feel comfortable with is a tradeoff and would be the elimination of improvements of two boundary streets which have little possibility for future development because of the terrain. These improvements could be swapped off to obtain improvements off -site specifically the bridge and roadway approach to the development. He stated that the additional right-of-way was requested along Black Road to support the widening of that street to the appropriate collector standard. Further, the proper pavement would be constructed with a turn around at the south end. He stated that the dedication of the 7 FILE Z- -A n . 10 feet on Black Road would give the minimum 50 foot right-of-way required for the 36 foot pavement. Mr. Scherer identified the issue of the driveway access point being required by ordinance to be at least 100 feet from the intersection. He said, given the circumstances of the development in and about this area and potential for this street, Public Works could support the placement of the driveway approximately 50 feet. To further expand on Public Works requirements for 36 foot pavement, he pointed to the fact that the ordinance requires for nonresidential uses or high density uses that the collector standard street be constructed. He pointed out that Public Works was going to require significant improvements on Black,Road away from this site, including the bridge and that would be expensive. Scherer stated that the bridge would have to be designed to carry a 36 foot roadway as well as 100 year flood plain requirements for Isom Creek. To clarify another point, Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, asked Mr. Scherer to comment on the 50 foot right-of-way when normally 36 is placed in a 60 foot collector. Mr. Scherer pointed out that 10 feet is all that this property owner could be required from this side with the existing 40 makes 50. The additional 10 feet would have to come from the west side if that were ever developed and dedicated. Mr. Scherer then responded following comments about adjacent properties primarily being the Old Oak area of secluded Hill Subdivision. He stated that a Phase V plat was being reviewed by Public Works Department and that, that, plat does extend Old Oak Drive to Black Road somewhat north of this project area. A commissioner questioned Mr. Scherer as to whether or not the City's future access needs would be met by the agreement that Public Works has agreed to. Mr. Scherer stated yes. Commissioner Chachere then posed a question as to whether or not Public Works was making their requirement on Black Road from Highway 10 all the way to the tract to be developed. A response from Mr. Scherer was, "Yes, from Highway 10 down to the termination device on Black Road adjacent to this property." He completed his comment by stating that he thought that this was approximately three city blocks. Commissioner Putnam then posed a question to the applicant, Mr. Willard Proctor, as to whether or not he understood and was willing to build the street from Highway 10 to collector standard all the way to his project. Mr. Proctor indicated that he understood and that he was willing to and would meet with Public Works to work this out. Commissioner Putnam then posed a question to Bobby Sims as to whether or not the development of this project violates the intended purpose of the River Mountain Land Use Plan. Sims' response was, "Yes, it is in conflict with the Plan." 8 FILE NO,: Z-5896-A (Cgnt._) Tony Bozynski, of the Planning Staff, then came to the microphone to answer a question of Mr. Putnam as to whether or not variances from that plan could be obtained. Bozynski offered a history of the Plan in this area and the numerous efforts to change the plan to rezone parcels within the Pankey Community. He indicated that of all the plans that have been presented, (some of which were not adopted) all of them indicated that the subject area was to be retained for single family residential development. He stated that he felt this would be a significant departure from the Plan as now approved. He further stated that this land use plan was adopted with the cooperation of the neighborhood. Bozynski indicated that the Donaghey Plan, a recent effort in the neighborhood, although not adopted, indicated west of Black Road a site for multifamily occupancy. He stated that the 56 units on this approximately 2 acres of land is rather high density for this area of Highway 10. He stated that the Plan where multifamily is reflected indicates densities of 10 to 12 units per acre. He stated that he was not certain at this point whether staff could offer a recommendation on amending the plan should the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application. He stated that staff would have to go back and look at a broader picture because this is a significant departure from the Plan. In a response to a question from Commissioner Willis, Bozynski pointed out that this site is approximately one block south of the area indicated on the Donaghey Plan for multifamily and across the street. In a response to a question from Commissioner Chachere about residences in the immediate area, Bozynski responded by stating that the Secluded Hill Subdivision is being developed immediately across Black Road on a large acreage tract. There are residences nearby in Pankey to the north and to the east. He pointed out that once the several houses on this block are removed that there will not be single family dwellings immediately adjacent, except to the west and terrain separates that visually from this site. In response to a question from Commissioner Willis about Black Road connection to Old Oak and Secluded Hills, Bozynski stated that it is a Master Street Plan connection shown as a collector. David Scherer, of the Public Works Department, buttressed Bozynski's remarks by indicating that Phase V of the Secluded Hills plat does include the extension of Old Oak Drive. The Chairman then moved the meeting to cards of opposition. He indicated that there was one from Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters. Mrs. Bell indicated that the League's position with regard to plans is that they be maintained unless there is some clear and compelling reason to make a modification in an adopted plan. She made a comment that there were no attendees from the adjacent Pankey neighborhood although their concerns were being voiced by her in their absence. She stated that the 9 FILL Z- -A n . League would like the Planning Commission to reject this application. The Chairman then asked whether Mr. Proctor, the applicant, desired to respond to anything that had been previously stated or offer new commentary. Mr. Proctor came forward and pointed out that there were persons present from Pankey. He pointed out that they were in favor of the project. He reminded the Commission that notices did go out to all the appropriate Pankey residences. Mr. Proctor then restated several of his previous comments concerning density, access and such as well as his tentative agreement with Public Works Department on a construction of access. Commissioner Willis then asked Mr. Proctor whether he proposed to erect a direction and identification sign at Black Road and Highway 10. Mr. Proctor responded by saying no. The discussion then moved to whether or not Mr. Proctor proposed to or would accept the idea of natural and undisturbed buffers, especially along the east side in lieu of a landscaped strip. Commissioner Willis then asked whether Mr. Brown could come forward and provide the Commission with insight on the Landscape Ordinance relationship to this project. After a lengthy discussion of ordinance requirements between Mr. Brown and several commissioners, the Chairman asked Mr. Proctor if would be willing to accept the Ordinance Standards for screening and buffering on the perimeter of his project. Mr. Proctor responded by saying yes. Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, injected a thought at this point to the effect that so far all the plan consisted of was a building footprint and sketchy access and parking layout. All of these amendments being offered should be prepared and resubmitted. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Sims pointed out that the PRD would be transferable to another property owner; however, the project would have to remain the same. The Chairman then placed the item before the Commission for a vote including in his comments the several modifications and waivers that would be requested by Mr. Proctor before the Board of Directors. These were: the agreement with Public Works on the streets, the reduction and improvements on some and the extension of off -site improvements in other areas. The second was a commitment to limiting the project to a legal specified number of occupants of certain ages. That he would meet the Ordinance requirements and design standards for the Buffer and Landscape Ordinances. The Chairman asked for additional comments from the Commission. There being none, the matter was placed on the floor for a vote. For the record, the Chairman indicated the elevations presented and this application would be made part of the record. The vote on the application presented was 7 ayes, 2 nays, 1 absent and 1 abstention. The application is approved. 10 < < FILE Z- -A NAME: NATIONAL HOMECARE VILLAGES, INC. -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED DISTRICT -RESIDENTIAL LOCATION: In the Pankey Community, between Black St. and Wells St., south of Piggee St., approximately 0.20 mile south of Cantrell Rd. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Willard Proctor, Jr., Agent Charles E. Miller WILLARD PROCTOR, JR. ATTORNEY CHARLIE MILLER ENGINEERING 1619 S. Broadway 1500 Aldersgate Rd. Little Rock, AR 72206 Little Rock, AR 72205 378-7720 225-7106 AREA: 2 ACRES ZONIN • R-2 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 450 PROPOSED USES: Multi-Family/Elderly Housing PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUEST : Approval of a waiver of the requirement to dedicate additional right-of-way for and to construct boundary streets along the south and east boundaries of the tract, and along the east one-half of the north boundary of the tract. BACKGROUND• The item was previously submitted as a re -zoning request, in which the appellant had requested a rezoning from R-2 to R-5. At the May 30, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, however, the applicant agreed to modify the rezoning to a planned development request. TATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to develop the 2 acre tract for elderly housing. The facility is to be housed in an "L"-shaped, two- story building containing a total of 56 apartments. Of the 56 total units, 20 are to be efficiency apartments, 35 are to be one bedroom units, and one unit is to be a two bedroom unit which is to be the residence of the manager. The building is to include a library, a recreation room, an exercise facility, a medical exam facility, a manager's and support staff offices, a dining room, and a kitchen facility. On -site parking for 32 vehicles is proposed. One-half street improvements to Black St. (the west boundary street) and to the west 150 feet of Piggee St. the north boundary street) are proposed, as is improvement to the existing wooden bridge located approximately 800 feet north of the site on FILE NO,: Z-5896-A (Cont.) Black St. A waiver of the requirement to improve the remaining boundary streets (the west and south boundary streets, and the east one-half north boundary street) is requested. Landscaping as required by the Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is to be provided. A. PROPQOALIREOVEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for a planned development for an elderly housing facility, and for a wavier of the boundary street requirements for two of the boundary streets (along the east and south boundaries of the site) and for the east 150 feet of a third boundary street (the north boundary street). The applicant proposes to construct a bridge to Master Street Plan standards to replace the existing wooden bridge structure on Black St., the bridge being located approximately 800 feet north of the site. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are two single-family homes located along the northern -most edge of the site, but, for the most part, the site is undeveloped. Thick woods cover the southern and eastern areas of the tract. There is a significant differential in ground elevation across the site, with an approximate 60 foot drop from the northwest corner of the tract to the southeast corner. The boundary streets along all four sides of the tract are either totally undeveloped or are substandard. Access to the site is from the northwest corner of the block, where Black St. dead -ends into the tract. Black St. along the western boundary of the site is undeveloped. Piggee St. is a "trail" to the eastern -most residence on the block, but for the remainder of the northern boundary of the site, Piggee St. is undeveloped. wells St. and Douglas St. are only dedicated rights -of -way along the eastern and southern boundaries, respectively, of the site; they are totally undeveloped. The existing zoning of the site is R-2. All surrounding land is zoned R-2. There are existing homes on the site, as well as on lots across Piggee St. to the north and on Wells St. to the east. There is a new single-family neighborhood being developed to the west, with a number of developed lots backing up to -the subject site. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: The Public Works staff notes the following: 1) Black St. is designated as a collector street on the Master Street Plan; the other boundary streets are designated as standard residential streets. KI FILE Z- -A n Construction of half street improvements to Master Street Plan standards (one-half of a 36 foot roadway for Black St. and one-half of a 27 foot roadway for the other three boundary streets), including construction of sidewalks, are required by the Ordinance. Dedication of additional right-of-way to meet Master Street Plan standards is required: 10 additional feet along Black St. and 5 additional feet along, the other three boundary streets. A minimum 20 foot radial dedication at intersections is required. The existing wooden bridge on Black St., located approximately 800 feet north of the applicant's site, and approximately 250 feet south of Cantrell Rd., is substandard, and cannot support the weight of emergency vehicles or construction -laden trucks. Access to the site, then, is severely limited, and off -site improvements to the bridge must be made in order for the development to have proper access. Public Works can support the waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for the east and south boundary streets, as well as the east one-half of the north boundary street, as long as the applicant agrees to meet the City Engineer's requirements for street improvements along both the Black St. boundary street and the Piggee St. boundary from Black St. eastward approximately 150 feet, as well as agreeing to re -construct the Black St. bridge to a standard required by the City Engineer. 2) There is a platted north -south alley shown on the original Pankey Subdivision plat. For the project, as presented, to proceed, the alley must be abandoned, with no easements retained. 3) The northern -most driveway on Black St. is too close to the intersection. The Master Street Plan requires that driveway entrances be no closer to intersections than 100 feet. It is recommended that a variance of this standard be pursued by the applicant to permit the driveway to be located 50 feet from the intersection. 4) Driveways must be shown to be 20 feet in width, minimum, and must be designated as "one-way". 5) The drive approach off Piggee St. does not conform to the Master Street Plan standards. It must be modified to permit maneuvering off-street and to permit trucks to unload without backing onto or blocking the street. 6) An excavation permit must be obtained prior to any construction activity. 3 FILE N4. Z-5896-A . _ (Cont.) 10 7) A stormwater detention analysis is required. The analysis for drainage must address the off -site capacity of existing drainage, as required by the ordinance. All street drainage is to be underground, conforming to City standards. Water Works comments that on -site fire protection will be required. The Fire Department comments that the drive-thru shall be designated a fire lane, and must be a minimum of 20' in width. On -site fire hydrants may be required. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Sec. 31-201.h states that: "Whenever a proposed (development) abuts a partially dedicated or constructed... street, the developer shall provide the minimum of one-half of the required improvements and right- of-way. The portion of the boundary streets on the half of the right-of-way abutting the applicant's site are, pursuant to the Code, to be constructed to Master Street Plan standards, with the required right-of-way dedicated. If this is not proposed to be done, then, waivers of this requirement must be approved by the Board of Directors. The applicant, as a response to this requirement, is seeking a waiver of these requirements for the east, south, and a portion of the north boundary streets. Dedication of the required right-of-way and construction of the street improvements, to standards imposed by the City Engineer, are proposed for the west and a portion of the north boundary street, as is construction of a new bridge to replace a sub- standard bridge off -site on Black St. The site plan is to show sidewalks, landscaping, and buffering. The Code requires, in Sec. 36-502.1, that, for elderly housing, 0.5 parking spaces be provided per unit. This development proposes 55 elderly housing units and 1 apartment for the manager. The required parking, then, would be 27.5 spaces for the elderly housing, plus 1.5 spaces for the standard multi -family unit, or, a total of 29 spaces. The applicant proposes 32 spaces. The Neighborhoods and Planning Site Plan Review Specialist comments that the buffer width requirement along Black St. is 14.5' (9.5' average with transfer). At no point should the buffer drop below 61; the Landscape Ordinance requires 6' minimum. No buffering has been shown on the submitted plan between the proposed parking lot and the right-of-way of Black St. 4 FILE Z- -A is The Planning staff point out that the proposed project is in the River Mountain planning district, and that the adopted Land Use Plan calls for this and the surrounding areas to be developed for single-family uses. The multi-family/elderly housing use which is proposed is in conflict with the adopted plan. E . ANALY SDI 0 : The Public works staff points out that the northern -most driveway onto Black St. is too close to the intersection, and recommends that a variance be requested by the applicant to permit the driveway to be 50 feet from the intersection, in lieu of 100 feet as required by the Ordinance. A variance for this deviation from Ordinance standards has not been requested by the applicant. Either the site plan must show the relocation of the driveway to a point not closer than 100 feet from the intersection, or a variance must be requested. The development involves construction of a 2-story "L"- shaped, multi -family building. The adopted Land Use Plan calls for the area to be developed in single-family uses. The multi -family character of the proposed development does not conform to the adopted plan. It is incompatible with the planned single-family development character of the surrounding area and with the single-family residential subdivision which is developing to the west F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (DUNE 8, 1995) Mr. Willard Proctor, the agent for the developer, was present. Staff outlined the request and reviewed with the Committee members and applicant the comments contained in the discussion outline. Mr. Proctor indicated that he would prepare and submit the needed information, and that the site plan would be revised to conform to the Public Works requirements. The Committee forwarded the item to the Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 27, 1995) Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, offered the staff recommendation, a brief history of the application and an update on the filing. The Chairman then identified for the record that there was only one card of a person present wishing to speak on this matter. This was a person speaking in favor of the petition. The applicant, Willard Proctor, then came forward. �1 t FILE Z- -A(Cont.) Mr. Proctor offered a lengthy history of his application and began presenting this proposal with the several variances that are requested. He pointed out the site plan that is being reviewed does not contain some of the amendments he desires to make at this time. Mr. Proctor clarified for the record that this is not a nursing home but a retirement center, apartments if you will. He stated that the variances he was requesting are as follows: 1. The requirement of dedication of right-of-way along Black Road adjacent to the site on the west. He stated the only streets that they wanted to develop would be Black Road along the west side in approximately 1/2 the length of Piggee Street on the north boundary. At this point he also indicated that the Public Works Department had made a requirement that he improve the bridge across Isom Creek, which lies approximately one block north this development. This would be done in order to accommodate access by emergency vehicles. It is currently a poor standard, wooden structure. 2. The second variance would be from the requirement that he improve the other two boundary streets on this block that being the east line and the south line. In response to a question from a commissioner, Mr. Proctor pointed out that he did have an agreement with Public Works on the construction of the bridge and for reduction of certain standards on abutting streets. 3. The next item or exception he pointed out was the driveway distance from the corner. He desired to have less than the required 100 feet. He then moved his comments to the issue of amendments to the application. The first of these being the planting of a 6 foot minimum width strip around the perimeter as a screening and buffering device. The next change indicated that he is proceeding with an application to abandon the alley that runs north and south through this block. It will be required prior to final platting or obtaining building permits. The next item of change on the plan would be the modification of the turning radius on Piggee Street entrance to accommodate truck access since this is the service entry. Mr. Proctor then moved his comments to the staff recommendation of denial. He pointed out that the staff's primary objection was based upon the adopted land use plan for the area which indicated single family and that his project is obviously multifamily. In defense of his position and his application, he offered that people who come here come to live here -- not like apartments. Proctor indicated that their facilities would be on -site such as dining and meeting rooms. Some transportation off -site may be 6 ILE NO.: Z-5896-A (Cori offered, they would also have their personal and recreational needs cared for on the premises. He pointed that the design of his structure would compliment the neighborhood. He stated that the existing zoning would lead to the construction of low cost housing in the area. His project would perhaps be more compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Proctor then offered to receive comments or questions. The first of these came from Commissioner Willis who asked how he arrived at the unit count. His response generally was that he felt this number could be accommodated by the neighborhood and the size of property. He also indicated that it was similar to what other areas could accommodate and contain. Commissioner Adcock asked for an explanation of his term "efficiency apartment." He indicated that his efficiency units would not have a kitchen, but that these units would be served by central dining facilities. He was also questioned as to the character of the medical on -site facility. He indicated this was nothing more than a mini-doctor's office since most of the occupants would be elderly. Commissioner Adcock then raised a question as to whether or not the building was handicap accessible, the appropriate heights for cabinets, doorway passage, hallways and such. Mr. Proctor's response was that the building was designed for the elderly. There will be units provided with special design but this would be primarily ambulatory residents. In response to several questions from the Commission, Mr. Proctor went on record as saying., He would commit to certain minimum percentages of these units being for the elderly and they would not be open for rental for younger persons. At this point, Commissioner Daniels pointed out his objection to this would be the reduction of the street right-of-way to less than what would be required. Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, inserted a comment at this point that he felt the Public Works Department needed to insert their thoughts into the record. David Scherer; of the Public Works Engineering section, presented Public Works' position on this matter. He stated this was basically an undeveloped area with limited or poor access over narrow streets with wooden bridges. He pointed out specifically, that, what Public Works would feel comfortable with is a tradeoff and would be the elimination of improvements of two boundary streets which have little possibility for future development because of the terrain. These improvements could be swapped off to obtain improvements off -site specifically the bridge and roadway approach to the development. He stated that the additional right-of-way was requested along Black Road to support the widening of that street to the appropriate collector standard. Further, the proper pavement would be constructed with a turn around at the south end. He stated that the dedication of the 7 FILE NO.; Z-5896-A. (Cont. 10 feet on Black Road would give the minimum 50 foot right-of-way required for the 36 foot pavement. Mr. Scherer identified the issue of the driveway access point being required by ordinance to be at least 100 feet from the intersection. He said, given the circumstances of the development in and about this area and potential for this street, Public Works could support the placement of the driveway approximately 50 feet. To further expand on Public Works requirements for 36 foot pavement, he pointed to the fact that the ordinance requires for nonresidential uses or high density uses that the collector standard street be constructed. He pointed out that Public Works was going to require significant improvements on Black Road away from this site, including the bridge and that would be expensive. Scherer stated that the bridge would have to be designed to carry a 36 foot roadway as well as 100 year flood plain requirements for Isom Creek. To clarify another point, Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, asked Mr. Scherer to comment on the 50 foot right-of-way when normally 36 is placed in a 60 foot collector. Mr. Scherer pointed out that 10 feet is all that this property owner could be required from this side with the existing 40 makes 50. The additional 10 feet would have to come from the west side if that were ever developed and dedicated. Mr. Scherer then responded following comments about adjacent properties primarily being the Old Oak area of secluded Hill Subdivision. He stated that a Phase v plat was being reviewed by Public Works Department and that, that, plat does extend Old Oak Drive to Black Road somewhat north of this project area. A commissioner questioned Mr. Scherer as to whether or not the City's future access needs would be met by the agreement that Public Works has agreed to. Mr. Scherer stated yes. Commissioner Chachere then posed a question as to whether or not Public Works was making their requirement on Black Road from Highway 10 all the way to the tract to be developed. A response from Mr. Scherer was, "Yes, from Highway 10 down to the termination device on Black Road adjacent to this property." He completed his comment by stating that he thought that this was approximately three city blocks. Commissioner Putnam then posed a question to the applicant, Mr. Willard Proctor, as to whether or not he understood and was willing to build the street from Highway 10 to collector standard all the way to his project. Mr. Proctor indicated that he understood and that he was willing to and would meet with Public Works to work this out. Commissioner Putnam then posed a question to Bobby Sims as to whether or not the development of this project violates the intended purpose of the River Mountain Land Use Plan. Sims' response was, "Yes, it is in conflict with the Plan." 8 FILE NO.; Z- -A n Tony Bozynski, of the Planning Staff, then came to the microphone to answer a question of Mr. Putnam as to whether or not variances from that plan could be obtained. Bozynski offered a history of the Plan in this area and the numerous efforts to change the plan to rezone parcels within the Pankey Community. He indicated that of all the plans that have been presented, (some of which were not adopted) all of them indicated that the subject area was to be retained for single family residential development. He stated that he felt this would be a significant departure from the Plan as now approved. He further stated that this land use plan was adopted with the cooperation of the neighborhood. Bozynski indicated that the Donaghey Plan, a recent effort in the neighborhood, although not adopted, indicated west of Black Road a site for multifamily occupancy. He stated that the 56 units on this approximately 2 acres of land is rather high density for this area of Highway 10. He stated that the Plan where multifamily is reflected indicates densities of 10 to 12 units per acre. He stated that he was not certain at this point whether staff could offer a recommendation on amending the plan should the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application. He stated that staff would have to go back and look at a broader picture because this is a significant departure from the Plan. In a response to a question from Commissioner Willis, Bozynski pointed out that this site is approximately one block south of the area indicated on the Donaghey Plan for multifamily and across the street. In a response to a question from Commissioner Chachere about residences in the immediate area, Bozynski responded by stating that the Secluded Hill Subdivision is being developed immediately across Black Road on a large acreage tract. There are residences nearby in Pankey to the north and to the east. He pointed out that once the several houses on this block are removed that there will not be single family dwellings immediately adjacent, except to the west and terrain separates that visually from this site. In response to a question from Commissioner Willis about Black Road connection to Old Oak and Secluded Hills, Bozynski stated that it is a Master Street Plan connection shown as a collector. David Scherer, of the Public Works Department, buttressed Bozynski's remarks by indicating that Phase V of the Secluded Hills plat does include the extension of Old Oak Drive. The Chairman then moved the meeting to cards of opposition. He indicated that there was one from Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters. Mrs. Bell indicated that the League's position with regard to plans is that they be maintained unless there is some clear and compelling reason to make a modification in an adopted plan. She made a comment that there were no attendees from the adjacent Pankey neighborhood although their concerns were being voiced by her in their absence. She stated that the 9 'FILE NO.: _Z-5896-A ( Can League would like the Planning Commission to reject this application. The Chairman then asked whether Mr. Proctor, the applicant, desired to respond to anything that had been previously stated or offer new commentary. Mr. Proctor came forward and pointed out that there were persons present from Pankey. He pointed out that they were in favor of the project. He reminded the Commission that notices did go out to all the appropriate Pankey residences. Mr. Proctor then restated several of his previous comments concerning density, access and such as well as his tentative agreement with Public Works Department on a construction of access. Commissioner Willis then asked Mr. Proctor whether he proposed to erect a direction and identification sign at Black Road and Highway 10. Mr. Proctor responded by saying no. The discussion then moved to whether or not Mr. Proctor proposed to or would accept the idea of natural and undisturbed buffers, especially along the east side in lieu of a landscaped strip. Commissioner Willis then asked whether Mr. Brown could come forward and provide the Commission with insight on the Landscape Ordinance relationship to this project. After a lengthy discussion of ordinance requirements between Mr. Brown and several commissioners, the Chairman asked Mr. Proctor if would be willing to accept the Ordinance Standards for screening and buffering on the perimeter of his project. Mr. Proctor responded by saying yes. Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, injected a thought at this point to the effect that so far all the plan consisted of was a building footprint and sketchy access and parking layout. All of these amendments being offered should be prepared and resubmitted. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Sims pointed out that the PRD would be transferable to another property owner; however, the project would have to remain the same. The Chairman then placed the item before the Commission for a vote including in his comments the several modifications and waivers that would be requested by Mr. Proctor before the Board of Directors. These were: the agreement with Public Works on the streets, the reduction and improvements on some and the extension of off -site improvements in other areas. The second was a commitment to limiting the project to a legal specified number of occupants of certain ages. That he would meet the Ordinance requirements and design standards for the Buffer and Landscape Ordinances. The Chairman asked for additional comments from the Commission. There being none, the matter was placed on the floor for a vote. For the record, the Chairman indicated the elevations presented and this application would be made part of the record. The vote on the application presented was 7 ayes, 2 nays, 1 absent and 1 abstention. The application is approved. 10 FILE Z- -A NAME: NATIONAL HOMECARE VILLAGES, INC. -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED DISTRICT -RESIDENTIAL LOCATION: In the Pankey Community, between Black St. and Wells St., south of Piggee St., approximately 0.20 mile south of Cantrell Rd. DEVELOPER: Willard Proctor, WILLARD PROCTOR, 1619 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 378-7720 AREA• 2 ACRES ENGINEER: Jr., Agent Charles E. Miller JR. ATTORNEY CHARLIE MILLER ENGINEERING 1500 Aldersgate Rd. 72206 Little Rock, AR 72205 225-7106 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 450 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Multi-Family/Elderly Housing PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 _VARIANCES REQUESTED: Approval of a waiver of the requirement to dedicate additional right-of-way for and to construct boundary streets along the south and east boundaries of the tract, and along the east one-half of the north boundary of the tract. BACKGROUND: The item was previously submitted as a re -zoning request, in which the appellant had requested a rezoning from R-2 to R-5. At the May 30, 1995 Planning Commission meeting, however, the applicant agreed to modify the rezoning to a planned development request. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to develop the 2 acre tract for elderly housing. The facility is to be housed in an "L"-shaped, two- story building containing a total of 56 apartments. Of the 56 total units, 20 are to be efficiency apartments, 35 are to be one bedroom units, and one unit is to be a two bedroom unit which is to be the residence of the manager. The building is to include a library, a recreation room, an exercise facility, a medical exam facility, a manager's and support staff offices, a dining room, and a kitchen facility. On -site parking for 32 vehicles is proposed. One-half street improvements to Black St. (the west boundary street) and to the west 150 feet of Piggee St. the north boundary street) are proposed, as is improvement to the existing wooden bridge located approximately 800 feet north of the site on FILE N Z- -(Cont.- Black St. A waiver of the requirement to improve the remaining boundary streets (the west and south boundary streets, and the east one-half north boundary street) is requested. Landscaping as required by the Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is to be provided. A. PROP AL RE u_EST Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for a planned development for an elderly housing facility, and for a wavier of the boundary street requirements for two of the boundary streets (along the east and south boundaries of the site) and for the east 150 feet of a third boundary street (the north boundary street). The applicant proposes to construct a bridge to Master Street Plan standards to replace the existing wooden bridge structure on Black St., the bridge being located approximately 800 feet north of the site. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are two single-family homes located along the northern -most edge of the site, but, for the most part, the site is undeveloped. Thick woods cover the southern and eastern areas of the tract. There is a significant differential in ground elevation across the site, with an approximate 60 foot drop from the northwest corner of the tract to the southeast corner. The boundary streets along all four sides of the tract are either totally undeveloped or are substandard. Access to the site is from the northwest corner of the block, where Black St. dead -ends into the tract. Black St. along the western boundary of the site is undeveloped. Piggee St. is a "trail" to the eastern -most residence on the block, but for the remainder of the northern boundary of the site, Piggee St. is undeveloped. Wells St. and Douglas St. are only dedicated rights -of -way along the eastern and southern boundaries, respectively, of the site; they are totally undeveloped. The existing zoning of the site is R-2. All surrounding land is zoned R-2. There are existing homes on the site, as well as on lots across Piggee St. to the north and on Wells St. to the east. There is a new single-family neighborhood being developed to the west, with a number of developed lots backing up to the subject site. C. ENGINEERING UTILITY CONSENTS: The Public Works staff notes the following: 1) Black St. is designated as a collector street on the Master Street Plan; the other boundary streets are designated as standard residential streets. 2 FILE Z- 6-A tl Construction of half street improvements to Master Street Plan standards (one-half of a 36 foot roadway for Black St. and one-half of a 27 foot roadway for the other three boundary streets), including construction of sidewalks, are required by the Ordinance. Dedication of additional right-of-way to meet Master Street Plan standards is required: 10 additional feet along Black St. and 5 additional feet along the other three boundary streets. A minimum 20 foot radial dedication at intersections is required. The existing wooden bridge on Black St., located approximately 800 feet north of the applicant's site, and approximately 250 feet south of Cantrell Rd., is substandard, and cannot support the weight of emergency vehicles or construction -laden trucks. Access to the site, then, is severely limited, and off -site improvements to the bridge must be made in order for the development to have proper access. Public works can support the waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for the east and south boundary streets, as well as the east one-half of the north boundary street, as long as the applicant agrees to meet the City Engineer's requirements for street improvements along both the Black St. boundary street and the Piggee St. boundary from Black St. eastward approximately 150 feet, as well as agreeing to re -construct the Black St. bridge to a standard required by the City Engineer. 2) There is a platted north -south alley shown on the original Pankey Subdivision plat. For the project, as presented, to proceed, the alley must be abandoned, with no easements retained. 3) The northern -most driveway on Black St. is too close to the intersection. The Master Street Plan requires that driveway entrances be no closer to intersections than 100 feet. It is recommended that a variance of this standard be pursued by the applicant to permit the driveway to be located 50 feet from the intersection. 4) Driveways must be shown to be 20 feet in width, minimum, and must be designated as "one-way". 5) The drive approach off Piggee St. does not conform to the Master Street Plan standards. It must be modified to permit maneuvering off-street and to permit trucks to unload without backing onto or blocking the street. 6) An excavation permit must be obtained prior to any construction activity. 3 FILE Z- -A(Cont.) i� 7) A stormwater detention analysis is required. The analysis for drainage must address the off -site capacity of existing drainage, as required by the ordinance. All street drainage is to be underground, conforming to City standards. Water Works comments that on -site fire protection will be required. The Fire Department comments that the drive-thru shall be designated a fire lane, and must be a minimum of 20' in width. On -site fire hydrants may be required. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. ISSUESILINICALIDESIGIN: Sec. 31-201.h states that: "Whenever a proposed (development) abuts a partially dedicated or constructed... street, the developer shall provide the minimum of one-half of the required improvements and right- of-way. The portion of the boundary streets on the half of the right-of-way abutting the applicant's site are, pursuant to the Code, to be constructed to Master Street Plan standards, with the required right-of-way dedicated. If this is not proposed to be done, then, waivers of this requirement must be approved by the Board of Directors. The applicant, as a response to this requirement, is seeking a waiver of these requirements for the east, south, and a portion of the north boundary streets. Dedication of the required right-of-way and construction of the street improvements, to standards imposed by the City Engineer, are proposed for the west and a portion of the north boundary street, as is construction of a new bridge to replace a sub- standard bridge off -site on Black St. The site plan is to show sidewalks, landscaping, and buffering. The Code requires, in Sec. 36-502.1, that, for elderly housing, 0.5 parking spaces be provided per unit. This development proposes 55 elderly housing units and 1 apartment for the manager. The required parking, then, would be 27.5 spaces for the elderly housing, plus 1.5 spaces for the standard multi -family unit, or, a total of 29 spaces. The applicant proposes 32 spaces. The Neighborhoods and Planning Site Plan Review Specialist comments that the buffer width requirement along Black St. is 14.5' (9.5' average with transfer). At no point should the buffer drop below 61; the Landscape Ordinance requires 6' minimum. No buffering has been shown on the submitted plan between the proposed parking lot and the right-of-way of Black St. 4 FILE Z- -A C n The Planning staff point out that the proposed project is in the River Mountain planning district, and that the adopted Land Use Plan calls for this and the surrounding areas to be developed for single-family uses. The multi-family/elderly housing use which is proposed is in conflict with the adopted plan. E. ANALYSIS• The Public Works staff points out that the northern -most driveway onto Black St. is too close to the intersection, and recommends that a variance be requested by the applicant to permit the driveway to be 50 feet from the intersection, in lieu of 100 feet as required by the Ordinance. A variance for this deviation from Ordinance standards has not been requested by the applicant. Either the site plan must show the relocation of the driveway to a point not closer than 100 feet from the intersection, or a variance must be requested. The development involves construction of a 2-story "L"- shaped, multi -family building. The adopted Land Use Plan calls for the area to be developed in single-family uses. The multi -family character of the proposed development does not conform to the adopted plan. It is incompatible with the planned single-family development character of the surrounding area and with the single-family residential subdivision which is developing to the west F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (TUNE 8, 1995) Mr. Willard Proctor, the agent for the developer, was present. Staff outlined the request and reviewed with the Committee members and applicant the comments contained in the discussion outline. Mr. Proctor indicated that he would prepare and submit the needed information, and that the site plan would be revised to conform to the Public Works requirements. The Committee forwarded the item to the Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 27, 1995) Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, offered the staff recommendation, a brief history of the application and an update on the filing. The Chairman then identified for the record that there was only one card of a person present wishing to speak on this matter. This was a person speaking in favor of the petition. The applicant, Willard Proctor, then came forward. 5 FILE Z- -A (Cont.) Mr. Proctor offered a lengthy history of his application and began presenting this proposal with the several variances that are requested. He pointed out the site plan that is being reviewed does not contain some of the amendments he desires to make at this time. Mr. Proctor clarified for the record that this is not a nursing home but a retirement center, apartments if you will. He stated that the variances he was requesting are as follows: 1. The requirement of dedication of right-of-way along Black Road adjacent to the site on the west. He stated the only streets that they wanted to develop would be Black Road along the west side in approximately 1/2 the length of Piggee Street on the north boundary. At this point he also indicated that the Public Works Department had made a requirement that he improve the bridge across Isom Creek, which lies approximately one block north this development. This would be done in order to accommodate access by emergency vehicles. It is currently a poor standard, wooden structure. 2. The second variance would be from the requirement that he improve the other two boundary streets on this block that being the east line and the south line. In response to a question from a commissioner, Mr. Proctor pointed out that he did have an agreement with Public Works on the construction of the bridge and for reduction of certain standards on abutting streets. 3. The next item or exception he pointed out was the driveway distance from the corner. He desired to have less than the required 100 feet. He then moved his comments to the issue of amendments to the application. The first of these being the planting of a 6 foot minimum width strip around the perimeter as a screening and buffering device. The next change indicated that he is proceeding with an application to abandon the alley that runs north and south through this block. it will be required prior to final platting or obtaining building permits. The next item of change on the plan would be the modification of the turning radius on Piggee Street entrance to accommodate truck access since this is the -service - entry. Mr. Proctor then moved his comments to the staff recommendation of denial. He pointed out that the staff's primary objection was based upon the adopted land use plan for the area which indicated single family and that his project is obviously multifamily. In defense of his position and his application, he offered that people who come here come to live here -- not like apartments. Proctor indicated that their facilities would be on -site such as dining and meeting rooms. Some transportation off -site may be 2 FILE NO.: _Z-5896-A (Con offered, they would also have their personal and recreational needs cared for on the premises. He pointed that the design of his structure would compliment the neighborhood. He stated that the existing zoning would lead to the construction of low cost housing in the area. His project would perhaps be more compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Proctor then offered to receive comments or questions. The first of these came from Commissioner Willis who asked how he arrived at the unit count. His response generally was that he felt this number could be accommodated by the neighborhood and the size of property. He also indicated that it was similar to what other areas could accommodate and contain. Commissioner Adcock asked for an explanation of his term "efficiency apartment." He indicated that his efficiency units would not have a kitchen, but that these units would be served by central dining facilities. He was also questioned as to the character of the medical on -site facility. He indicated this was nothing more than a mini-doctor's office since most of the occupants would be elderly. Commissioner Adcock then raised a question as to whether or not the building was handicap accessible, the appropriate heights for cabinets, doorway passage, hallways and such. Mr. Proctor's response was that the building was designed for the elderly. There will be units provided with special design but this would be primarily ambulatory residents. In response to several questions from the Commission, Mr. Proctor went on record as saying, He would commit to certain minimum percentages of these units being for the elderly and they would not be open for rental for younger persons. At this point, Commissioner Daniels pointed out his objection to this would be the reduction of the street right-of-way to less than what would be required. Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, inserted a comment at this point that he felt the Public Works Department needed to insert their thoughts into the record. David Scherer, of the Public Works Engineering section, presented Public Works' position on this matter. He stated this was basically an undeveloped area with limited or poor access over narrow streets with wooden bridges. He pointed out specifically, that, what Public Works would feel comfortable with is a tradeoff and would be the elimination of improvements of two boundary streets which have little possibility for future development because of the terrain. These improvements could be swapped off to obtain improvements off -site specifically the bridge and roadway approach to the development. He stated that the additional right-of-way was requested along Black Road to support the widening of that street to the appropriate collector standard. Further, the proper pavement would be constructed with a turn around at the south end. He stated that the dedication of the 7 FILE NO.: Z- 6-A (Cont. 10 feet on Black Road would give the minimum 50 foot right-of-way required for the 36 foot pavement. Mr. Scherer identified the issue of the driveway access point being required by ordinance to be at least 100 feet from the intersection. He said, given the circumstances of the development in and about this area and potential for this street, Public Works could support the placement of the driveway approximately 50 feet. To further expand on Public Works requirements for 36 foot pavement, he pointed to the fact that the ordinance requires for nonresidential uses or high density uses that the collector standard street be constructed. He pointed out that Public Works was going to require significant improvements on Black Road away from this site, including the bridge and that would be expensive. Scherer stated that the bridge would have to be designed to carry a 36 foot roadway as well as 100 year flood plain requirements for Isom Creek. To clarify another point, Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, asked Mr. Scherer to comment on the 50 foot right-of-way when normally 36 is placed in a 60 foot collector. Mr. Scherer pointed out that 10 feet is all that this property owner could be required from this side with the existing 40 makes 50. The additional 10 feet would have to come from the west side if that were ever developed and dedicated. Mr. Scherer then responded following comments about adjacent properties primarily being the Old Oak area of secluded Hill Subdivision. He stated that a Phase V plat was being reviewed by Public works Department and that, that, plat does extend Old Oak Drive to Black Road somewhat north of this project area. A commissioner questioned Mr. Scherer as to whether or not the City's future access needs would be met by the agreement that Public Works has agreed to. Mr. Scherer stated yes. Commissioner Chachere then posed a question as to whether or not Public Works was making their requirement on Black Road from Highway 10 all the way to the tract to be developed. A response from Mr. Scherer was, "Yes, from Highway 10 down to the termination device on Black Road adjacent to this property." He completed his comment by stating that he thought that this was approximately three city blocks. Commissioner Putnam then posed a question to the applicant, Mr. Willard Proctor, as to whether or not he understood and was willing to build the street from Highway 10 to collector standard all the way to his project. Mr. Proctor indicated that he understood and that he was willing to and would meet with Public Works to work this out. Commissioner Putnam then posed a question to Bobby Sims as to whether or not the development of this project violates the intended purpose of the River Mountain Land Use Plan. Sims' response was, "Yes, it is in conflict with the Plan." 8 FILE NO.: Z-58_96-A _ (Con Tony Bozynski, of the Planning Staff, then came to the microphone to answer a question of Mr. Putnam as to whether or not variances from that plan could be obtained. Bozynski offered a history of the Plan in this area and the numerous efforts to change the plan to rezone parcels within the Pankey Community. He indicated that of all the plans that have been presented, (some of which were not adopted) all of them indicated that the subject area was to be retained for single family residential development. He stated that he felt this would be a significant departure from the Plan as now approved. He further stated that this land use plan was adopted with the cooperation of the neighborhood. Bozynski indicated that the Donaghey Plan, a recent effort in the neighborhood, although not adopted, indicated west of Black Road a site for multifamily occupancy. He stated that the 56 units on this approximately 2 acres of land is rather high density for this area of Highway 10. He stated that the Plan where multifamily is reflected indicates densities of 10 to 12 units per acre. He stated that he was not certain at this point whether staff could offer a recommendation on amending the plan should the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application. He stated that staff would have to go back and look at a broader picture because this is a significant departure from the Plan. In a response to a question from Commissioner Willis, Bozynski pointed out that this site is approximately one block south of the area indicated on the Donaghey Plan for multifamily and across the street. In a response to a question from Commissioner Chachere about residences in the immediate area, Bozynski responded by stating that the Secluded Hill Subdivision is being developed immediately across Black Road on a large acreage tract. There are residences nearby in Pankey to the north and to the east. He pointed out that once the several houses on this block are removed that there will not be single family dwellings immediately adjacent, except to the west and terrain separates that visually from this site. In response to a question from Commissioner Willis about Black Road connection to Old Oak and Secluded Hills, Bozynski stated that it is a Master Street Plan connection shown as a collector. David Scherer, of the Public Works Department, buttressed Bozynski's remarks by indicating that Phase V of the Secluded Hills plat does include the extension of Old Oak Drive. The Chairman then moved the meeting to cards of opposition. He indicated that there was one from Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters. Mrs. Bell indicated that the League's position with regard to plans is that they be maintained unless there is some clear and compelling reason to make a modification in an adopted plan. She made a comment that there were no attendees from the adjacent Pankey neighborhood although their concerns were being voiced by her in their absence. She stated that the 9 FILE Z- -A League would like the Planning Commission to reject this application. The Chairman then asked whether Mr. Proctor, the applicant, desired to respond to anything that had been previously stated or offer new commentary. Mr. Proctor came forward and .pointed out that there were persons present from Pankey. He pointed out that they were in favor of the project. He reminded the Commission that notices did go out to all the appropriate Pankey residences. Mr. Proctor then restated several of his previous comments concerning density, access and such as well as his tentative agreement with Public Works Department on a construction of access. Commissioner Willis then asked Mr. Proctor whether he -proposed to erect a direction and identification sign at Black Road and Highway 10. Mr. Proctor responded by saying no. The discussion then moved to whether or not Mr. Proctor proposed to or would accept the idea of natural and undisturbed buffers, especially along the east side in lieu of a landscaped strip. Commissioner Willis then asked whether Mr. Brown, could come forward and - provide the Commission with insight on the Landscape Ordinance relationship to this project. After a lengthy discussion of ordinance requirements between Mr. Brown and several commissioners, the Chairman asked Mr. Proctor if would be willing to accept the Ordinance Standards for screening and buffering on the perimeter of his project. Mr. Proctor responded by saying yes. Bobby Sims, of the Planning Staff, injected a thought at this point to the effect that so far all the plan consisted of was a building footprint and sketchy access and parking layout. All of these amendments being offered should be prepared and resubmitted. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Sims pointed out that the PRD would be transferable to another property owner; however, the project would have to remain the same. The Chairman then placed the item before the Commission for a vote including in his comments the several modifications and waivers that would be requested by Mr. Proctor before the Board of Directors. These were: the agreement with Public Works on the streets, the reduction and improvements on some and the extension of off -site improvements in other areas. The second was a commitment to limiting the project to a legal specified number of occupants of certain ages. That he would meet the Ordinance requirements and design standards for the Buffer and Landscape Ordinances. The Chairman asked for additional comments from the Commission. There being none, the matter was placed on the floor for a vote. For the record, the Chairman indicated the elevations presented and this application would be made part of the record. The vote on the application presented was 7 ayes, 2 nays, 1 absent and 1 abstention. The application is approved. 10