HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5936-A Staff AnalysisNAME: The Village At Chenal - Long -Form Planned Commercial
Development (Revocation and Re-establishment)
LOCATION: On the west side of Chenal Parkway, approximately
0.75 mile north of the Kanis Road intersection.
nRvRLoPER :
ENGINEER:
Jack McCray Joe White
Deltic Farm & Timber Co., Inc. White-Daters & Associates, Inc.
#7 Chenal Club Circle 401 S. Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72211 Little Rock, AR 72201
138.4 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 80 FT. NEW STREET: 20,000
ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USES:
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19
CENSUS TRACT: 42.02
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
BACKGROUND:
Mixed uses including
Commercial, Office, and
Residential uses
This PCD received preliminary approval from the Planning
Commission on January 10, 1995 and by the Board of Directors on
February 21, 1995 a companion ordinance was passed by the Board
on February 21, 1995 providing for certain street design
standards to be varied from ordinance requirements. Ordinance
No. 16,851 establishing the PCD and 16,852 reducing standards
require revocation and re-establishment in a modified form.
FILE NO.: Z -5936/Z-4807 (Cont.)
This plan was a new concept mixed use project with special
street design, mixed structures and a controlled environment.
STAFF UPDATE AND OWNERS PROPOSAL:
This PCD did not develop as proposed and required within three
years. Therefore, the planned development requires
modification. The owner desires to pursue uses on portions of
the land that will revert to C-2 and stay within the permitted
uses of that district. A site plan review by the Planning
Commission would follow on the C-2 parcel.
The developer proposes to retain the commercial, office and
residential elements as included within the original PCD, north
of Rahling Road extended and southwest of the C-2 tract, (47.88
acres). The C-2 parcel would be developed separately from the
PCD and on a different time schedule.
The PCD as re-established along with the several design
variances would be granted an additional three years as a
conceptual planned development.
What this means is that the 1995 planned use and design remains
the controlling plan with the Planning Commission reviewing
final plans in a public hearing prior to building permits.
Although there will be two ordinances going to the City Board;
one zoning and one on street variances, the Planning Commission
should act with one motion since the street design matters are
an integral part of the PCD Plan. The Board will act on two
ordinances to approve the plan.
STAFF RECONNENDATIONS:
The staff recommends approval of the requested restructure and
reinstatement of this PCD (concept only) with the understanding
that the phases of development shall each be presented to the
Planning Commission for final plan and plat review.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 25, 2000)
The staff reported to the Commission that there was only one
person of record with opposition and that letter from William
Thomas. After briefly discussing the issue, it was determined
that the final Plan and plat will have to receive public hearing
and notice and that this item should be placed on the consent
2
FILE NO.: Z -5936/Z-4807 (Cont.
agenda for approval. A motion to add this item to the Consent
Agenda was made. The Consent Agenda was approved by a vote of
8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and i open position.
3
May 25, 2000
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z -5936/Z-4807
NAME: The Village At Chenal - Long -Form Planned Commercial
Development (Revocation and Re-establishment)
LOCATION: On the west side of Chenal Parkway, approximately 0.75
mile north of the Kanis Road intersection.
T1F.IMMOPF.R
ENGINEER:
Jack McCray Joe White
Deltic Farm & Timber Co., Inc. White-Daters & Associates, Inc.
#7 Chenal Club Circle 401 S. Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72211 Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 138.4 acres
ZONING: PCD
NUMBER OF LOTS: 80 FT. NEW STREET: 20,000
PROPOSED USES:
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19
CENSUS TRACT: 42.02
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
BACKGROUND:
Mixed uses including
Commercial, Office, and
Residential uses
This PCD received preliminary approval from the Planning
Commission on January 10, 1995 and by the Board of Directors on
February 21, 1995 a companion ordinance was passed by the Board
on February 21, 1995 providing for certain street design
standards to be varied from ordinance requirements. Ordinance
No. 16,851 establishing the PCD and 16,852 reducing standards
require revocation and re-establishment in a modified form.
May 25, 2000
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -5936/Z-4807
This plan was a new concept mixed use project with special street
design, mixed structures and a controlled environment.
STAFF UPDATE AND OWNERS PROPOSAL:
This PCD did not develop as proposed and required within three
years. Therefore, the planned development requires modification.
The owner desires to pursue uses on portions of the land that
will revert to C-2 and stay within the permitted uses of that
district. A site plan review by the Planning Commission would
follow on the C-2 parcel.
The developer proposes to retain the commercial, office and
residential elements as included within the original PCD, north
of Rahling Road extended and southwest of the C-2 tract, (47.88
acres). The C-2 parcel would be developed separately from the
PCD and on a different time schedule.
The PCD as re-established along with the several design variances
would be granted an additional three years as a conceptual
planned development.
What this means is that the 1995 planned use and design remains
the controlling plan with the Planning Commission reviewing final
plans in a public hearing prior to building permits.
Although there will be two ordinances going to the City Board;
one zoning and one on street variances, the Planning Commission
should act with one motion since the street design matters are an
integral part of the PCD Plan. The Board will act on two
ordinances to approve the plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
The staff recommends approval of the requested restructure and
reinstatement of this PCD (concept only) with the understanding
that the phases of development shall each be presented to the
Planning Commission for final plan and plat review.
2
May 25, 2000
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
FILE NO.: Z -5936/Z-4807
(MAY 251' 2000)
The staff reported to the Commission that there was only one
person of record with opposition and that letter from William
Thomas. After briefly discussing the issue, it was determined
that the final Plan and plat will have to receive public hearing
and notice and that this item should be placed on the consent
agenda for approval. A motion to add this item to the Consent
Agenda was made. The Consent Agenda was approved by a vote of
8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position.
3