Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6120-I Staff AnalysisJanuary 29, 2004 ITEM NO.: F NAME: Capitol Hills Apartments Revised Long -form PD -R FILE NO.: Z-6120-1 LOCATION: On the southwest corner of Capitol Hills Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue DEVELOPER: Jay DeHaven 10650 Maumelle Blvd. Maumelle, AR 72113 CAIr'_IAIC1=D- White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 31.85 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -R, Planned Development - Residential ALLOWED USES: Multi -family; 16.57 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD -R PROPOSED USE: Multi -family; 16.57 units per acre — deferral of the street construction of Rushmore Avenue VARIAN CES/WAIVE RS REQUESTED: Deferral of the street construction of Rushmore Avenue until adjacent Lot 3 is developed. January 29, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6120-1 BACKGROUN On June 20, 1996 the Planning Commission approved a proposal to rezone 42.58± acres from R-2, Single-family to MF -12, Multi -family. The rezoning request was associated with Capitol Lakes Estates preliminary plat, a 190 + acre development (File No. S-1100). The property shown for Multi -family was located in two tracts lying on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road (Rushmore Avenue), south of a proposed minor arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard). The application was the third version of proposed multi -family zoning associated with Capitol Lakes Estates. The first version consisted of a proposal to zone 31+ acres at the southeast corner of the Capitol Lakes Estates Plat from R-2 to MF -18. Staff was not supportive of the proposed density and the application drew opposition from the residents of Spring Valley Manor Subdivision, which is adjacent to the south. The application was later withdrawn by the applicant at the Planning Commission Public Hearing. The second version consisted of a proposal to zone 33.8+ acres at the intersection of the realigned Cooper Orbit Road and an 'as yet unnamed minor arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard) from R-2 to MF -12. The proposed multi -family property was in two tracts, a 27+ acre tract lying south of the arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard) and a 7+ acre tract lying north of the arterial. The multi -family property was moved well north of the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision and residents of that neighborhood supported this version. Staff was also able to recommend approval of the application. The density had been reduced from MF -18 to MF -12. The proposed Multi -family property was basically within the body of the Capitol Lakes Estates plat with only a perimeter relationship to the Oasis Renewal Center on the collector street (Rushmore Avenue) and an arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard). There was some opposition to this proposal from the Oasis Renewal Center. The Planning Commission voted to approve this application on April 25, 1996. The applicant continued to work with the Oasis Renewal Center with their concern of locating the 7+ acres of Multi -family property adjacent to their site. After reaching a compromise with the Oasis Center, the applicant withdrew this second application from the Board of Directors' agenda and filed a third version of the proposed rezoning request. The third version consisted of a proposal to zone 42.58+ acres on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road (Rushmore Avenue) from R-2 to MF -12. The proposed Multi -family property was in two tracts on either side of the new alignment of Cooper Orbit Road, south of the proposed new arterial street (Capitol Hills Boulevard). The 27+ acre tract lying south of the arterial and west of proposed Cooper Orbit Road is the same as in the second (approved) application. The 7+ acres which was approved on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) was moved to a point south of the arterial, on the east side of the proposed alignment of 4 January 29, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6120-1 Cooper Orbit Road and increased to 14.81 acres. The 7+ acres on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) was to remain zoned R-2 and was shown as a "reserved" tract on the Capitol Lakes Estates Preliminary Plat. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,312 rezoning the property from R-2 to MF -12, with conditions, on November 7, 1996. The conditions were as follows: Any development which occurs on the property described as Tract C, that tract located on the east side of Rushmore Avenue was to be limited to 125 dwelling units, Three acres within the property described as Tract C was to be dedicated as Open Space and not developed, Capitol Lakes Estates was not to be developed prior to implementation of sanitary sewer service, whether brought about through formation of a new sewer improvement district, expansion or the existing sewer improvement district or some other more feasible cooperative alternative, and with respect to that portion of property zoned MF -12 which would front on the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road, a twenty (20) foot natural buffer was to be maintained along the frontage of the newly aligned Cooper Orbit Road. If it became necessary to regrade the buffer zone, the regraded area within the twenty foot buffer strip was to be replanted to a planting density fifty (50) percent greater than that specified in the Little Rock landscaping ordinance. The rezoning contained Tract A, 27.77 acres, from R-2, Single-family to MF -12 and Tract C, 14.81 acres, from R-2, Single-family to MF -12. Ordinance No. 18,496, in June of 2001, established a PRD titled Village on the Lakes Long -form PRD (this rezoning took a part of Tract C 11.59 acres of the 14.81 acres). The development was proposed to be an attached single-family, townhouse development; 11 buildings with a total of 44 single-family residential dwellings on 11.59 acres located east of the proposed Rushmore Avenue. (A proposed density of 5.3 units per acre.) On July 11, 2002 the Commission reviewed a request to rezone the property on the west side of Rushmore Avenue to Planned Development — Residential to allow the development of a 528 unit apartment complex. The applicant proposed the placement of 904 parking spaces within the development. A separate request was also filed for a property zoned MF -12 and located to the east of the PD -R site. The request to rezone the property to the east from MF -12 to R-2 was also approved on July 11, 2002. Both Ordinances were approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors at their August 20, 2002 Public Hearing. Ordinance No. 18,729 rezoned the western MF -12 property to PD -R and Ordinance No. 18,728 rezoned the eastern MF -12 site to R-2. The applicant proposed the PD -R development to be constructed in three phases with 156 units being constructed in Phase of One and Two and 216 units in the third and final phase. Capitol Hills Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue are currently under construction and will be completed with Phase I to allow access to the site. 3 a January 29, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6120 - Ordinance No. 18, 898 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 15, 2003 approved a revision to allow the creation of a three lot plat following the previously proposed phasing lines. The applicant indicated all three lots would have public street frontage but access to the public streets only located on Lots 1 and 3. Lot 2 would take access through a cross access easement across Lots 1 and 3. The Lots were numbered according to the previous phase lines. The previous drainage and utility plan did not changed from the original submission. The applicant revised the building placement ever so slightly to allow for landscape strips between lots as required by ordinance. The applicant indicated a cross access parking agreement was not required since each lot has sufficient parking to meet the typical minimum parking demand for multi -family development. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,963 on October 21, 2003, revising the PD -R to allow the placement of two trash compactors on the site. The applicant indicated a private contractor will service the compactors once a week. The applicant stated with the compactors near the entrance this should allow the driver easy accessibility and minimal disturbance of the residents in the early morning hours when the compactors are serviced. The development also destroyed the required land use buffer areas previously proposed on the west and south perimeters of Phase 1 (Lot 1). The request included a restoration plan for the buffer areas. The restoration plan included plantings in the area previously designated as the land use buffer area be replanted at double the plantings required by the landscape ordinance. This included the area to the south and the west on Lot 1 of the development. The approval included planting of all trees of three inch caliper and additional 30 -feet of land to the south was to be retained in a conservation easement and the 30 -feet along with the buffer remaining on Lot 2 be combined with a tract designated south of Lot 3 to ensure the buffer be maintained in the future. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is requesting to phase the construction of Rushmore Avenue at the eastern boundary of the site until Lot 3 is developed. The site was originally approved as a single tract development and was later revised to allow three lots to develop following previously approved phasing lines. The applicant is now requesting since the PD -R for Capitol Hills Apartments was revised to allow the creation of the three lots a deferral of street improvements be granted until the lot abutting the roadway is developed (Lot 3). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered with heavy woods surrounding the site. The property is currently zoned PD -R with the remainder of the area being zoned R-2, Single-family. The Oasis Renewal Center is located northeast of the site and the El January 29, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO_: Z-6120-1 Spring Valley Manor Subdivision is located south of the site. Cooper Orbit Road borders the eastern boundary of the property. The roadway is a narrow unimproved roadway with deep ditches in several locations. Capitol Hills Boulevard and Rushmore Avenue have been cleared and are currently under construction and will be completed with Phase I to allow access to the site. Phase I of the development is also under construction with a majority of the site currently cleared. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received numerous informational phone calls from area residents. The Spring Valley Manor Neighborhood Association, the Gibraltar Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners Association, along with all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site, and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ANALYSIS: The current request is to stage street construction for Rushmore Avenue. When the site was originally reviewed by the Commission the site was a single tract and there was not a request for phasing of boundary street construction. The Planning Commission approved street completion concurrent with Phase 1. Sections 36-453 (a) and (d) of the zoning ordinance allow staging including streets and required adherence to the plan. The applicant did not contemplate nor request any such staging. In addition, submitted a grading plan to staff indicating development was imminent. The roadway has been cleared the roadway. Additional language in the ordinance requires final plan approval before the first building permit with the PD -R can be issued. This approval has already occurred. Creating lots through a revision to the PD -R is an option for the owner/developer, but does not preclude the conditions and plan established for the PD -R. Staff feels the road should be constructed as was originally approved and the deferral not be granted to allow the street construction with Lot 3 of the development. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. 5 January 29, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-6120-1 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 4, 2003) Mr. James Dreher and Mr. Bill Dean of Civil Design were present representing the request. There were three registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Staff stated the applicant had presented road construction with Phase I of the apartment development. Staff stated the changing of the proposed development from phasing lines to lot lines did not change the required street improvements. Staff stated phasing of street improvements was usually approved as a part of the initial request. Mr. Ross Phillips addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated the intent of the development was to construct the roads as a part of the original development and was approved in 1996. He stated the road was to be constructed to allow traffic to flow from the neighborhood and to cut -through from Colonel Glenn Road. He stated the applicant did not request the road to be phased with the apartments and he requested the Commission keep the proposed road as was previously approved. Ms. Anita Spence addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated her concern was with the traffic from the neighborhood meeting with the apartment traffic. She stated if Rushmore Avenue was not constructed then the- traffic from the neighborhood and the traffic from the apartments would meet at the existing narrow two-lane bridge. She stated it was critical for Rushmore Avenue to be constructed with the existing phase of the apartments. Mr. Roger Lewis addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. Mr. Lewis stated the proposed road name was not consistent with the existing road name. He questioned why Rushmore Avenue was not being called Cooper Orbit Road. Staff stated Rushmore Avenue was a proposed collector street, which would turn to the west a point south of the apartments. Staff stated Cooper Orbit Road would then travel south following the existing alignment. Mr. James Dreher addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the request was to not construct Rushmore Avenue at the present time. He stated with the development of the area to the east of Rushmore Avenue and the proposed single- family development located to the south of the apartment development the construction of Rushmore was premature. He stated the proposed layout was not the most advantageous for development. He stated with the deferral of the street construction until a later phase of the apartment development the roadway location could be firmed up. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the proposed request, if the application should be an amendment to the PRD or the preliminary plat for the single-family development. There was also a discussion concerning the ability of Mr. Dean and Mr. Dreher to address the Commission on behalf of the owner. Staff stated they did not 0 January 29, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6120-1 have an executed affidavit on file to allow these two men the ability to make binding decisions on behalf of the owner. Staff recommended the application be deferred to the January 29, 2004, Public Hearing to allow the applicant, Mr. Andy Francis to be present and/or allow the owner to submit all the necessary forms to allow Civil Design to act as the owner's agent. A motion was made to defer the item to the January 29, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 1 noe and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter on January 15, 2004 requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff is supportive of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 29, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter on January 15, 2004 requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. N FILE NO.: Z -6120-E NAME: Capitol Hills Apartments Long -form PD -R LOCATION: South side of West Kanis Road at Rushmore Avenue DEVELOPER: John W. Deldaren 10605 Maumelle Blvd. Maumelle, AR 72113 AREA: 31.85 Acres CURRENT ZONING NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 MF -12 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ALLOWED USES: Multi -family; 12 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PD -R PROPOSED USE: Multi -family; 16.57 units per acre VARIANCESMIAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On June 20, 1996 the Planning Commission approved a proposal to rezone 42.58+ acres from R-2. Single-family to MF -12; Multi -family. The rezoning request was associated with Capitol Lakes Estates preliminary plat, a 190 + acre development (File No. S-1100). The property shown for Multi -family was located in two tracts lying on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road, south of a proposed minor arterial street. The application was the third version of proposed multi -family zoning associated with Capitol Lakes Estates. FILE NO.: Z -6120-E Cont. The first version consisted of a proposal to zone 31+ acres at the southeast corner of the Capitol Lakes Estates Plat from R-2 to MF -18. Staff was not supportive -of the proposed density and the application drew opposition from the residents of Spring Valley Manor Subdivision which is adjacent to the south. The application was later withdrawn, at the Planning Commission, by the applicant.- The pplicant. The second version consisted of a proposal to zone 33.8+ acres at the intersection of the realigned Cooper Orbit Road and an as yet unnamed minor arterial street from R-2 to MF -12. #hTof the arterial street ar7lly d a 7+ property tract lying tracts, a 27+ acre tract lying north of the arterial. The multi -family property was moved well north ofthe Spring Valley Manor Subdivision and residents of that neighborhood supported this version. Staff was also able to recommend approval of the application. The density had been reduced from MF -18 to MF -12. The proposed Multi -family property was basically within the body of the Capitol Lakes Estates plat with only a perimeter relationship to the Oasis Renewal Center on the collector street and an arterial street. There was some opposition to this proposal from the Oasis Renewal Center. The Planning Commission voted to approve this application on April 25, 1996. The applicant continued to work with the Oasis Renewal Center with. their concern of locating the 7+ acres of Multi -family property adjacent to their site. After - reaching a compromise with the Oasis Center, the applicant withdrew this second application from the Board of Directors' agenda and filed a third version of the proposed rezoning request. The third version consisted of a proposal to zone 42.58+ acres on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road from R-2 to MF -12. The proposed Multi -family property was in two tracts on either side of the new alignment of Cooper Orbit Road, south of the proposed new arterial street. The 27+ acre tract lying south of the arterial and west of proposed Cooper Orbit Road is the same as in the second (approved) application. The 7+ acres which was approved on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) was moved to a point south of the arterial, on the east side of the proposed alignment of Cooper Orbit Road and increased to 14.81 acres. -The 7+ acres on -the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) was to remain zoned R-2 and was shown as a "reserved" tract on the Capitol Lakes Estates Preliminary Plat. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,312 rezoning the property from'R-2 to MF -12, with conditions, on November 7, 1996. The conditions were as follows: Any development which occurs on the property described as Tract C, that tract located on the east side of Rushmore Avenue was to be limited to 125 dwelling units, Three acres within the property described as Tract C was to be dedicated as Open Space and not developed, Capitol Lakes Estates was not to be developed prior to implementation of sanitary sewer service, whether brought about through formation of a new sewer improvement district, expansion or the 2 LE NO.: Z -6120-E (Cont. existing sewer improvement district or some other more feasible cooperative alternative, and with respect to that portion of property zoned MF -12 which wou front on the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road, a twenty (20) foot naturalId was to be maintained along the frontage of the newly aligned Cooper Orb tRoad, If it became necessary. to regrade the buffer zone, the regraded area with' twenty foot buffer strip was to be replanted to a planting density fifty 50 e� the greater than that specified in the Little Rock landscaping ordinance. p cent rezoning contained Tract A, 27.77 acres, from R-2, Single-family to MF -12 aTh ne Tract C, 14.81 acres, from R-2, Single-family to MF -12. d Ordinance No. 18,496, in June of 2001, established a PRD titled Village an the Lakes Long -form PRD (this rezoning took a part of Tract C 11.59 acres 14.81 acres). The development was proposed to be an attached single-faf the g amity, townhouse development; 11 buildings with a total of 44 single-family resid dwellings on 11.59 acres located east of the proposed Rushmore Aven ential proposed density of 5.3 units per acre.) Ue. (A A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property to Planned Development Residential to allow the development of a 528 unit apartment development. The applicant is proposing the placement of 904ar spaces with the development. The site is currently zoned MF -12 as is property located to the east. The applicant has filed a separate rezoning request to rezone the property to the east from Z -6120-F). MF -12 to R-2 {File No. The applicant proposes the development to be constructed in three phases with 156 units being constructed in Phase of One and Two and 216 units in the third and final phase, Vilest Kanis Road and Rushmore Avenue are currently under construction and will be completed with Phase 1. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered with heavy woods surrounding the site. The property is currently zoned MF -12 as is a smaller tract to the east. The remainder of the area is zoned R-2 with the exception of a PRD located just east of the site. The Oasis Renewal Center is located northeast of the site and the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision is located south of the site. Cooper Orbit Road borders the eastern boundary of the Property. The roadway is a narrow unimproved roadway with deep ditches in several locations. 3 FILE NO.: Z -6120-E Cont. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff.has received numerous phone calls from area residents. The. Spring Valley Manor Neighborhood Association, the Gibraltar Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners Association, along with all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site, and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D, ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1, West Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 50 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Rushmore Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. 3. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half of a divided 4 -lane parkway, one-half of a 14 -foot median, and 5-f6ot sidewalks with Planned Development. 4. Construct off-site one-half arterial to connect to existing Cooper Orbit Road. Show tie-in plan and/or public temporary turnarounds. 5. Dedicate 10 feet of additional right-of-way and construct right -turn lanes per MSP at westernmost driveway and at Rushmore Avenue. 6. Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standards. 7. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 8. NPDES and grading permits are required prior to construction, site grading, and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved. 9. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show adequacy and .phasing, if proposed. 10. Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are required: 11. Obtain permits' (barricadelstreet cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in right-of-way. 12. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at 340-4880 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light requirements. 13. Street Improvement pians shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. rd FILE NO.: Z -6120-E (Cont.) 14. Show cross-sections of proposed development prior to 'Planning Commission hearing. Conform to Land Alteration Ordinance, including slopes and terraces. E. UTILITIES -AND FIRE DEPARTMENTICDUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for project. ENTERGY: Additional easements will be required. Can not be described at this time. Will depend on developer wanting overhead or underground service. Contact Entergy at 954-5165 for additional details. ARKLA: ARKLA has large high pressure main on the backside (west) of this development. It is located in an existing easement. Contact ARKLA at 377-4669 for additional details. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water: A water main extension will be required in order to serve this property. On site fii-e'projection will be required. An acreage charge of $600 per acre currently applies in addition to normal charges in this area. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2428 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional details at 918-3752. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F: ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development - Residential for apartments. A land use plan amendment for a change to Multi -family is a separate item on this agenda. (File No. LU02-18-03) 5 FILE NO.: Z -6120-E (Cont) City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.. Landscape: Interior landscape islands must be at least 300 square feet in areas and 7 %Z feet in width. Some of the proposed parking lots need additional interior landscaping to break up the large paved areas. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings is required along the southern and western perimeters of the site. Curb and gutter will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Because of the grade changes, it will be necessary to provide cross- sections. Building Codes: No comment received. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: May 30, 2002 Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application: Staff briefly described the project noting additions which were needed on the proposed site plan. Staff stated the applicant would be required to rezone the property to the east to keep with an agreement previously made with the Spring Valley Manor Neighborhood with regard to density. The applicant indicated a rezoning application had been filed and the request would be heard by the Commission at their July 11, 2002 Public Hearing. Staff questioned the building materials proposed for the development. Staff stated this would be an issue with the area residents and compatibility was a concern. Staff also stated building elevations would be required. Staff stated the buffer to the south was a zoning buffer and the buffer to the west would need to be increased to meet the ordinance requirement. The applicant stated the interior islands would be increased as recommended by staff and the developer would install dense evergreen plantings along the west and south perimeters. Public Works comments were addressed. Mr. White stated the developer would construct '/ street improvements as a part of the development. He stated no streets were in place and the streets would have to be constructed for the development to function. Mr. White stated a regional C.1 H LE NO.: Z -6120-E detention facility was proposed and an area was set aside for detention and shown on the owner's master plan. There being no further issues for discussion, the Committee forward the application to the full Commission for resolution. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted revised plans to staff indicating the requested changes proposed by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant provided cross sections and building elevations to represent the intensity of the development on the site. The buildings are proposed at three story (not to exceed 35 -feet in height) and each building have either 24 or 36 units. The applicant proposes the buildings to be constructed of cement fiber siding and brick in selected locations. Due to grade elevations some of the buildings are proposed with pedestrian bridges from the parking area to the building. In Phase I the applicant proposes to construct 156 units in six (6) buildings. The proposal includes five (5) buildings with 24 units each and one building with thirty-six units. Phase ii is proposed with- two (2) buildings housing 24 units arid -three (3) buildings housing 36 units for a total of 156 units. The third and final phase is anticipated to have six (6) buildings of 24 units and three (3) buildings of 36 units for a total of 216 units. The applicant proposes to construct 876 parking spaces within the development. The minimum number required per the Zoning Ordinance would be 792 spaces. The applicant's proposed number more than exceeds the minimum required. Each phase of the development will also have sufficient parking to meet the minimum parking requirement per the Zoning Ordinance. The density- of the development is proposed at 16.6 units per acre. The site is a 31.85 acre site currently zoned MF -12 or 12 units per acre. As part of the rezoning request in 1996 a 14.81 acre site was zoned MF -12 but limited to 125 units. The rezoning in June of 2001 removed a portion of the acreage allowable (8.28 acres) and zoned the site to PRD at a density of 5.3 units per acre. The applicant is proposing to rezone the entire area (50 acres) in two separate zoning actions to PD -R and R-2, Single-family. The proposal includes 31.85 acres of multi -family and the remainder as single family. Based on previous allowable densities the developer is proposing a similar density but is keeping the density on one site rather than on each side of rA FILE NO.- Z -6120-E the proposed Rushmore Avenue. Had the developer developed the site as previously approved in 1996 the developer would have been allowed multi -family on 46.66 acres, (125 units on the 14.81 acre site and 382 units on the'31.85 acre site) and 507 units. The current proposal includes 528 units of multi -family an addition of 20 units total units to the area. - Staff is supportive of the requested Planned Development - Residential. The density proposed is not greatly different than the density approved by the City and agreed to by the neighborhood previously. The proposed development would confine the multi -family to one site and not on each side of Rushmore Avenue; developing the east side as single family which is in keeping with the indicated desire of the area residents. Otherwise, to staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed development. 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Planned Development subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 11, 2002) Mr. Jim Hathaway -and Mr. Joe White were present representing the application. There were two objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions noted in the "Staff Recommendation" above. Mr. Hathaway stated he had met with the Directors of the Property Owners Association and was aware of their concerns. He stated one of the concerns was the limited amenities the development offered; one clubhouse and one pool, and the developer had agreed to add a second clubhouse and pool as well as a fitness center. He stated Spring Walley Manor was 3/81 of a mile south of the development and the Property Owners were :concerned residents of 'the - development would "come down" and use the Association's lakes for recreational activities. Mr. Hathaway also stated the concept behind the use of the Planned Development process was the additional controls the neighborhood received. He stated the PRD as proposed did increase the overall number of units previously approved for the entire Capitol Lakes development but the proposed development concentrated the multi -family on one side of Rushmore Avenue; at the intersection of two major streets. L -*3 FILE NO.: Z -6120-E (Cont.) Ms. Eulalia Araoz spoke in opposition of the development. She stated her property adjoined the development to the east with frontage to Cooper Orbit Road. She stated with the realignment of Cooper Orbit Road to the new Rushmore Avenue her property would no longer.have access to a public street. Ms.'Araoz stated according to Public Works staff her property would be provided a pave access through the proposed development. Mr. Hathaway stated he had been in contact with Ms. Araoz's attorney and furnished him with copies of agreements made when the property was rezoned to PRD. He stated the agreement at the time of preliminary platting for Capitol Lakes Estates a commitment was made to allow the Araoz's access through a deed and not just an easement. He stated upon completion of Phase I the Araoz's would be given a deed to sufficient land to allow a road into their property, He stated further more when Tract C was rezoned to PRD a second agreement was made to allow access to the southern portion of their property, from Rushmore Avenue. He stated the Araoz's would have two (2) points of access to their property both of which were tied to development of surrounding land. Mr. Rusty Sparks spoke in opposition of the application as filed. He stated he was representing the Capitol Lakes Estates Property Owner's Association. Mr. Sparks stated there were several concerns with the development: He stated those were traffic, ingress and egress from the site, the existing narrow bridge located in the County on Cooper Orbit Road and the lack of landscaping shown on the site plan. He stated the developer had not furnished grading plans as were previously provided. He stated the site was a difficult site to develop due to the terrain. He stated grading plans were essential to determine the cuts and fills required for building the site. Mr. Sparks stated as a part of the previous approval a 20 -foot buffer was required along Rushmore Avenue. He stated the current proposal did not indicate a buffer. He stated the residents desire was to maintain the rural character of the area and the buffer was the only assurance the character of the area would be maintained. He stated the residents were unclear as to the height of the buildings. He stated the residents had been told the maximum building height would be 35 -feet but the buildings proposed were three story. He stated stressed the importance of clarification of building heights. He stated the neighborhood was opposed to a major entrance onto Rushmore Avenue. He stated the development would require two entrances but both those should be located on West Kanis Road. N July 11,2002 ITEM NO.: B(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -6120-F He stated the residents were unclear as to the height of the buildings. He stated the residents had been told the maximum building height would be 35 -feet but the buildings proposed were three story. He stated stressed the importance,: of clarification of building heights. He stated the neighborhood was opposed to a major entrance onto Rushmore Avenue. He stated the development would require two entrances but both those should be located on West Kanis Road. Mr. Hathaway stated the bridge was outside the confines of the Capitol Lakes Estates property boundary. He stated currently offsite improvements were not required by the City for a development to occur. He stated the buildings were to be three stories in height and the terrain would determine the finished elevation. Mr. Hathaway stated the proposed density of the development was not significantly greater than previously approved. He stated a new traffic impact analysis would not show any significant change from the previous analysis. Mr. Hathaway .stated the, current proposal included a buffer along Rushmore - Avenue. He stated in. some cases the buffer was well above the 20 -feet but in some places the buffer dropped below the 20 -feet. Mr. Hathaway stated if the developer were required to keep the 20 -foot buffer some areas currently show above the 20 -feet would be eliminated. Mr. Hathaway stated the site was a challenge to work with and the current .proposal was designed to maximize the green areas while still allowing for development to occur. Mr. Hathaway stated two entrances were proposed for the site. He stated there would be a grand entrance on West Kanis Road and a secondary entrance on Rushmore Avenue. Mr. Hathaway stated West Kanis Road was proposed as a principal arterial and Rushmore Avenue was proposed as a collector. He stated the roadway design would lend itself amenable to the potential traffic produced from the site.- Mr. ite: Mr. Hathaway stated the -current proposal with the addition of the clubhouse and pool on the eastern perimeter made the appearance of two smaller developments. He stated the massing of multi -family in one area was good planning practice allowing the east side of Rushmore Avenue to develop as single-family. Commissioner Nunnley questioned the bridge design and public safety. Public Works Staff stated traffic was not an issue raised in the review by Traffic Engineering. Staff stated redevelopment of the area would necessitate the reconstruction of the bridge. Staff stated the roadway was approved in 1997 as We July 11., 2002 ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -612-E a five -lane roadway and at that time no mechanism was put in place to replace the existing bridge. There was. a general discussion concerning.the lack of 9 -Capitol Improvements Plan for the City. A question was raised concerning the 20 -foot buffer not being shown. Staff stated the 20 -foot buffer was a condition of approval not a Landscaping Ordinance requirement. A motion was made to accept the proposed PD -R as filed. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 noe, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. 11 LE NO.: Z -6120-F Owner: Capitol Lakes Management, LLC Applicant: The Hathaway Group Location: Along Cooper Orbit Road, approximately 0.4 mile south of Kanis Road Request: To revoke a PRD (Tracts C-1 and D, Capitol Lakes Estates) and rezone Tracts C-1 and C-2, Capitol Lakes Estates from MF -12 to R-2. Purpose: Single Family Residential Development Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North — Undeveloped; zoned R-2 and The Oasis development; zoned R-2 South — Undeveloped; zoned R-2 East — Undeveloped; zoned R-2 West — Undeveloped; zoned R-2 and MF -12 (proposed PRD) A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Provide legal access to landowner to the east, with development of this property. 2. Previously approved uses of land for regional stormwater detention and new arterial right-of-way must be maintained or alternatives approved by Public Works. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. FILE NO.: Z -6120-F C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and the Spring Valley Manor, Parkway Place and Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning request. Staff could identify no residents within 300 feet of the site. D. LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a zone change from Planned Residential Development and MF -12 Multifamily to R-2 Single Family for new residential development. A land use plan amendment for a change to Single Family is an item on this agenda. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. E. STAFF ANALYSIS: On November 7, 1996 the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 17,312 rezoning two (2) areas of the Capitol Lakes Estates development from R-2 to MF -12. One of the MF -12 zoned areas (Tracts C-1 and C-2) is 14.82 acres in size and was limited to a maximum of 125 dwelling units. The rezoning ordinance also required three (3) acres of open space within the 14.82 acres and a 20 foot natural buffer along the MF -12 frontage on the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road (Rushmore Avenue). On June 5, 2001, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 18,496 which rezoned Tracts D and C-1; Capitol Lakes Estates (12.82 acres) from R-2/MF-12 to PRD, for an attached single family residential (townhouses) development. The approved development included 11 buildings with a total of 44 single family residential dwellings. The applicant proposes to revoke the previously approved PRD, and have Tracts C-1 and D revert to their previous zoning (Tract C-1 — MF -12, Tract D — R-2). The applicant then proposes to rezone Tract C-1 (8.57 acres) and Tract C-2 (6.25 acres) from MF -12 to R-2. The down -zoning of Tracts C-1 and C-2 is proposed in order to transfer and concentrate all of the multifamily units currently permitted within Capitol Lakes Estates to Tract B, located west of this site. A PRD (Item B on this agenda) has been filed for Tract B to address this issue. A Land Use Plan Amendment (Item A on 2 FILE NO.: Z-6120 this agenda) has also been filed to change Tracts C-1 and C-2 from Low Density Residential to Single Family Residential. Staff is supportive of the PRD revocation and rezoning request. Staff feels that the applicant's plan to concentrate all of the permitted, multifamily' units within the Capitol Lakes Estates development to Tract B, thereby resulting in the down -zoning of Tracts C-1 and C-2 to R-2, is appropriate. The proposed R-2 zoning for Tracts C-1 and C-2 will be compatible with all of the adjacent properties. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested PRD revocation and rezoning of Tracts C-1 and C-2, Capitol Lakes Estates to R-2, subject to compliance with the Public Works requirements as noted in paragraph A. of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 11, 2002) Jim Hathaway and Joe White were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed rezoning with a recommendation of approval. There were several persons present with concerns. This application was discussed simultaneously with Items LU02-18-03 and Z -6120=E. Jim Hathaway addressed the Commission in support of the rezoning application. Eulalia Araoz, property owner immediately east of Tract C, addressed the Commission with concerns relating to access to her property with the development of Capitol Lakes Estates. Mr. Hathaway noted that with the final plat of Phase I, Capitol Lakes Estates, a portion of Tract D would be deeded to the Araozes for access. He also noted that with the development of Tract C, a public street would be constructed to the Araoz's property. Rusty Sparks, representing the Spring Valley Manor property owners, discussed the history of the Capitol Lakes Estates development. He noted support for the downzoning of Tract C to R-2. He primarily discussed issues related to the PRD zoning of Tract B. Technical issues associated with the PRD zoning of Tract B, Capitol Lakes Estates were discussed at length. There was a motion to approve the R-2 zoning as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. The application was approved. K, FILE NO.: Z -6120-D NAME: Village On The Lakes - Long -Form PRD LOCATION: Along Cooper Orbit Road, approximately 0.4 mile south of Kanis Road DEVELOPER: Capitol Lakes Estates, LLC P. O. Box 13246 Maumelle, AR 72113 ENGINEER: Civil Design, Inc. 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 11.59 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 44 FT. NEW STREET: 1,030 linear feet ALLOWED USES: Multifamily MF -12 (with conditions) PROPOSED USE: Attached Single Family Residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On June 20, 1996 the Planning Commission by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent and 1 abstention approved the Capitol Lakes Estates - Preliminary Plat with conditions. The plat failed at the Board of Directors level only because the various waivers (minor street length, lot depth and width, pipe -stem lots, street grades) failed. The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat resolving design, Master Street Plan and easement issues. On December 18, 1997 the revised preliminary plat was approved by the Planning Commission with a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays except for one (1) abstaining vote on the variance for pipestem lot request. On January 20, 1998, the Board of Directors approved variances for pipestw.m lots and cul-de-sac length. On February 17, 1998, the Board of Directors approved ordinances establishing the Capitol FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont.) Lakes Municipal Property Owner's Improvement District No. 6 and the Capitol Lakes Sewer Property Owner's improvement District No. 148. On April 15, 1999 the Planning Commission granted a one (1) year time extension for the approved preliminary plat. Since that time, the developer has been working on obtaining Corps of Engineers permits and off-site sewer improvements, as well as final design work on Phase I. According to the City's Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-94, an approved preliminary plat shall remain effective "...as long as work is actively progressing...". Staff feels that the developer is actively working toward the final platting of Phase I, and that the approved preliminary plat is still in effect. On November 7, 1996 the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 17,312 rezoning two (2) areas of the Capitol. Lakes Estates development from R-2 to MF -12. One of the MF -12 zoned areas (shown as Tracts C-1 and C-2 on the attached Capitol Lakes Estates Master Plan) is 14.81 acres in size and was limited to a maximum of 125 dwelling units. The rezoning ordinance also required three (3) acres of open space within the 14.81 acres and a 20 foot natural buffer along the MF -12 frontage on the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road (Rushmore Avenue). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone 11.59 acres (shown as Tracts C-1 and D on the attached Capitol Lakes Estates Master Plan) from R-2/MF-12 to PRD for an attached single- family residential (townhouses) development. The proposed development includes 11 buildings with a total of 44 single family residential. dwellings. The sale of each unit will include the ground under the unit and a small yard area, therefore a preliminary plat is proposed as a component of the PRD development request. Each single family lot will be approximately 3,200 square feet in area. Each single family unit will be two-story construction, with between 2,100 and 2,400 square feet of building area. The applicant has submitted proposed building elevations which are attached for Planning Commission review. The proposed PRD development will have two (2) access points from Rushmore Avenue, as noted on the attached site plan. The northernmost access (Pinion Drive) will be a private drive. The southernmost access drive (Castor Drive) will be a dedicated public street with 60 feet of right-of-way. In addition to providing access to this development, both streets will provide access to the adjacent property to the east. FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont.) ' B. C. Tract D (zoned R-2) as shown on the attached Capitol Lakes Estates Master Plan is included in the PRD rezoning request. A detention pond is shown on Tract D which will handle stormwater detention for the northern portion of the project. Two (2) detention ponds within the southern portion of Tract C-1 will handle additional drainage. There is also an 8 foot walk/bike path shown within Tract D. This pedestrian path will tie into the sidewalk along West Kanis Road and extend along the east boundary of Tract C-1 to the sidewalk along Castor Drive. The applicant has noted that all common areas and private streets will be under the control of a property owners' association. The maintenance of the private streets, access drives, drainage areas, internal walk/bike paths and common areas will be provided by the property owners' association and addressed in -the Bill of Assurance for the neighborhood. The proposed site plan shows a monument -type sign location at the corner of Rushmore Avenue and West Kanis Road. There is also a directional/entry sign at each development entrance from Rushmore Avenue. The applicant proposes to construct the PRD townhouse development (in one phase) concurrently with the construction of Phase I of the Capitol Lakes Estates Subdivision. The applicant has noted that if the development concept for Tract C-1 proves successful, Tract C-2 (as shown on the Master Plan) will be submitted for PRD rezoning at a later date, for continuation of the attached single family residential development. Amenities including a pool, clubhouse and basketball court will be provided in the future PRD site plan for Tract C-2. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is undeveloped and wooded, with varying degrees of slope. The existing Cooper Orbit Road runs through this property, along the property's east boundary. There is R-2 zoned property to the north and east, with additional MF -12 zoned property immediately south. The Spring Valley Manor Subdivision is located further south. The proposed Rushmore Avenue is located along the property's west boundary, with additional MF -12 zoned property across Rushmore Avenue to the west. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls from persons requesting information on the proposed PRD development. The Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association was notified of the public hearing. 3 FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont.) D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. West Kanis Road and Rushmore Avenue are listed on the Master Street Plan as minor arterials. A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline is required. 2. Pinion Drive and Castor Drive are classified on the Master Street Plan as commercial streets. Dedicate 60 feet right-of-way and construct full improvements to the property. 3. Cactus Court and Basil Court need to be terminated with cul-de-sac or hammerhead. 4. Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development. 5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 7. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. S. Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are required. 9. A grading permit and development permit for special flood hazard area is required prior to construction. 10. Provide Street light plants to Traffic Engineering (contact Steve Phiphott 340-4856). 11. Relocate dumpster. Current location doesn't provide adequate turning radius for trucks. 12. Provide 180' taper for lane reduction on Rushmore. 13. Provide 50' throat section (at the intersection) on Rushmore (for WB dual left turns) . E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements to serve property. Capacity Analysis required, contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details. Entergy: No Comments received. ARKLA: No Comments received. Southwestern Bell: Approved if developer can provide a way of contact to units 1-3 and 23-36 by conduit. Easements will be needed to efficiently provide any telephone terminals near power. Contact Marco Barker at 373-3715 for details. L! FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont.) Water: The existing 12 -inch water main will have to be relocated at the Developer's expense. Additional off-site improvements may be required to provide adequate fire flows for multi -family development. There is an existing private fire hydrant off the existing 12 -inch main. Adequate service to that fire hydrant must be maintained. Installation of water facilities including on- site fire protection will be required and will be installed at the Developer's expense. Acreage fee of $600 per acre and development fee based on the size of connection apply in addition to normal charges. Fire Department: No emergency turnaround shown (cul-de-sac). Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Dennis Free at 918- 3752 for details. County Planning: No Comments received. CATA: Site is not on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Residential Development for attached single-family housing. The property is currently zoned MF -12 Multifamily. A land use plan amendment is not required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape Issues: No Comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 12, 2001) Bill Dean and Jim Hathaway were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed PRD development. Staff noted that some additional information 5 FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont was needed on the project and additional items needed to be shown on the proposed site plan and preliminary plat. Bill Dean noted that the PRD project would be developed in one (1) phase. He noted that the PRD would be developed concurrently with Phase I of the Capitol Lakes Estates Subdivision. In response to a question from staff, Mr. Dean noted that the development would not utilize City garbage collection. He noted that the proposed trash compactor would be moved to a more centralized location of the property. The Public Works requirements were discussed. The proposed streets which run from Rushmore Avenue to the 80 -acre property to the east were discussed at length. Public Works noted that these two streets needed to be public streets given the future development potential of the adjacent 80 -acre tract. Staff made the applicant aware of the Fire Department comments as noted in paragraph E. of this report. Mr. Dean noted that he would meet with the Fire Department to resolve the turnaround issue. Mr. Hathaway briefly discussed the PRD rezoning with the Committee. He noted that the applicant had also filed an MF -12 rezoning application for seven acres of property to the west. (Item 1. on this agenda). After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the PRD to the full Commission for resolution. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan and preliminary plat to staff on April 19, 2001. The revised site plan addresses the issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee. The revised plan provides turnarounds at the ends of the internal streets, moves the garbage compactor to a central location and shows sign locations. The revised plan also shows areas of the site which will remain undisturbed. The revised preliminary plat complies with the requirements as set forth by staff at the Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised site plan shows three (3) sign locations. There is a monument sign at the corner of Rushmore Avenue and West Kanis Road and a directional sign at each 1.1 FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont.) ' development entrance. The monument sign will have a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum area of 32 square feet, as typically allowed by City ordinance for a subdivision. Each directional sign will have a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum area of four (4) square feet. The signs are shown on the plan in the right- of-way. The signs must be moved out of the right-of-way and be at least five (5) feet back from property lines. Each unit as shown on the plan will have a two -car garage. The ordinance typically requires one (1) parking space per single family lot. There are no parking issues associated with the development. As noted in paragraph A., the proposed PRD development will have two (2) access points from Rushmore Avenue. The northern access will be a private drive (Pinion Drive), with the southern access (Castor Drive) being a dedicated public street with 60 feet of right-of-way. These two (2) streets will provide access to the PRD development and the adjacent property to the east. The Bill of Assurance for this subdivision must explain that the private access easements within this property will be for the benefit of the individual lot owners and the adjacent property owner to the east. The applicant has noted that this proposed attached single family residential development will be constructed in one (1) phase. The project will be developed concurrently with the construction of Phase I of the Capitol Lakes Estates Subdivision. After construction of the new streets within Phase I of Capitol Lakes Estates the portion of the existing Cooper Orbit Road which runs through the east portion of this property must be abandoned. As noted on the attached master plan, West Kanis Road will tie into the existing Cooper Orbit Road at the northeast corner of the property. Rushmore Avenue will attach to the existing Cooper Orbit Road right-of-way at the completion of Phase I and again with the completion of Phase II. To staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with proposed PRD rezoning. The Public Works Department has reviewed the revised site plan and preliminary plat and notes that there are no issues left to be resolved. The applicant has done a good job in addressing the issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee, and 7 FILE NO_: Z -6120-D (Cont.) revising the plans accordingly. The rezoning of this property from MF -12 to PRD for an attached single family development (platted lots, owner -occupied) should have no adverse impact on the general area, as the proposed density will be 5.3 single family dwellings per gross acre. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the PRD rezoning subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D and E of this report. 2. Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away from adjacent R-2 zoned property. 3. The garbage compactor must be screened on three (3) sides with an eight (8) foot high opaque fence or wall. 4. The maintenance of the private streets, access drives, drainage areas, internal walk/bike paths and common areas must be provided by the property owner's association and explained in the Bill of Assurance for the subdivision. S. The Bill of Assurance must also explain that the access easements are for the benefit of the individual lot owners and the adjacent property owner to the east. 6. The abandonment of the section of Cooper Orbit Road which runs through this property must not take place until the new streets within Phase I, Capitol Lakes Estates are constructed and accepted by the City. 7_ The maximum sizes for the proposed signs will be as noted in paragraph H. of this report. The signs must be moved out of the right-of-way and be at least five (5) feet back from property lines. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 3, 2001) Jim Hathaway and James Dreher were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed PRD with a recommendation of approval as noted in paragraph I. of this report. There were two (2) persons present with concerns. Jim Hathaway addressed the Commission in support of the application. He asked to hear from the concerned parties and then respond to the concerns. Eulalia Araoz, adjacent property owner to the east, discussed the two (2) proposed access points to her property through the M. FILE NO.: Z -6120-D (Cont.) PRD development. She discussed various notations within the agenda report. She stated that Pinion Drive should be a public street. Carlos Araoz, also owner of the adjacent property to the east, addressed the Commission. He also stated that Pinion Drive should be a public street. Jim Hathaway stated that the approved preliminary plat for Capitol Lakes Estates provided for access to the Araoz property from the north at the northeast corner of the Capitol Lakes property. He noted that this PRD development would provide a much better access to the Araoz property. He noted that Public Works revised their original recommendation, and supported Pinion Drive to be a private street as long as it extended to the Araoz property. There was additional discussion of the issue of access to the adjacent east property. Commissioner Nunnley asked if the staff recommendation included both Pinion and Castor Drives being public streets. Bob Turner, Director of Public Works, explained that he had met with the applicant and that Public Works supported Pinion Drive as a private street. Commissioner Lowry asked if a 24 foot wide street (Pinion Drive) would be sufficient for fire protection and access. Mr. Turner noted that the street would support fire access and that the street would provide an emergency/secondary access to the adjacent east property. Mr. Turner noted that Public Works supported the project as proposed. Commissioner Rahman questioned why the private street (Pinion Drive) extended to the adjacent east property. Mr. Turner noted that he did not know how the property to the east would develop in the future. He stated that Pinion Drive would provide an emergency access to the east property. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Adcock asked about past Fire Department letters relating to street width and on -street parking. Mr. Turner discussed this issue. Commissioner Adcock asked if there would be "no parking" signs on Pinion Drive. James Dreher stated that each single family unit would have a two -car garage and he did not anticipate on - street parking. 9 FILE NO.: Z-6120-D (Cont.) lt There was further discussion of the access to the adjacent property to the east. It was also discussed and noted that the Fire Department had no problem with the proposed site plan. There was a motion to approve the PRD rezoning as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 nay and 1 absent. 10 May 3,,2001 ITEM NO.: 1 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: FILE NO.: Z -6120-C Capitol Lakes Estates, LLC Jim Hathaway Western perimeter of Capitol Lakes Estates, south of proposed West Kanis Road extension Rezone from R-2 to MF -12 Future multifamily development 7.28± acres Undeveloped, wooded SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Undeveloped; zoned R-2 South - Undeveloped; zoned R-2 East - Undeveloped; zoned MF -12 West - Undeveloped; PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS proposed Capitol Lakes Estates;. proposed Capitol Lakes Estates; proposed Capitol Lakes Estates; zoned R-2 1. Rushmore Blvd. and Unknown arterial are classified on the Master Street Plan as minor arterials. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. With Building Permit: 2. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to .these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development. 3. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 5.NPDES and grading permits are required prior to construction, site grading, and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved. 6. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. May 3, 2001 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6120-C PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All owners of land located within 200 feet of the site and the Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association were notified of the proposed rezoning. There are no residents within a 300 -foot radius of the site to be notified by staff. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The adopted Plan recommends Low Density Residential and Single Family for this site. Insomuch as a plan is to be general in nature, staff believes no Plan Amendment is necessary. This tract and all surrounding properties are wooded and undeveloped. Allowing the minor expansion of the LDR designation to encompass these additional 7± acres seems reasonable. The site is not within an area covered by a neighborhood action plan. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this wooded, undeveloped, 7.28± acre tract from "R-2" Single Family to "MF -12" Multifamily. The property is located on the western perimeter of the proposed Capitol Lakes Estates development; west of and adjacent to An existing, 25± acre MF -12 zoned tract. The 7.28± acre tract is located approximately 1;700 feet west of the current alignment of Cooper Orbit Road. H The area was previously platted as a street and 14 single family lots. Final engineering has proven that the terrain is too steep to develop as it was preliminarily platted. The applicant has revised the preliminary plat by removing the 14 lots and street and by combining the 7.28± acres with the larger 25± acre, multifamily tract. This item was previously on the Commission's December 7, 2000 agenda. Prior to the hearing, the applicant requested that the item FJ May 3, 2001 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6120-C be withdrawn, without prejudice. The Commission approved that request on December 7, 2000. Staff is supportive of the rezoning request. The area to be rezoned is approximately 1/3 mile from the nearest residence in the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision, the nearest single- family development. This site and all surrounding properties are currently heavily wooded and undeveloped. The proposed Capitol Lakes Estates development abuts the site on the north, south and east. The site abuts a large area of wooded, undeveloped property on the west. This 7.28± acre tract is bounded by a proposed arterial street (west Kanis Road) on the north, a 25± acre, MF -12 zoned tract on the east and proposed single-family lots on the south. Since the difficulty of the terrain will prevent the development of the tract as single-family homes, staff believes the best use for the site is to add it to the adjacent multifamily tract. When the zoning for Capitol Lakes Estates was first approved in 1996, there were difficulties associated with the multifamily that was proposed at that time. Two tracts of multifamily were proposed; a 25 acre tract to be located on the west side of the new alignment of Cooper Orbit Road (to be called Rushmore Avenue) and 13± acres located on the east side of Rushmore Avenue. Concerns centered on the smaller tract which was known as Tract "B" and as a result, when the zoning was approved by the Board of Directors, the following conditions were attached: ■ Any development which occurs on the property described as Tract B in Section 1 of this Ordinance shall be limited to 125 dwelling units. Three acres within the property described as Tract B in Section 1 of this Ordinance will be dedicated as Open 3 Space and not developed. Capitol Lakes Estates shall not be developed prior to implementation of sanitary sewer service, whether brought about through formation of a new sewer improvement district, expansion of the existing sewer improvement district or some other more feasible cooperative alternative. 3 May 3,.2001 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6120-C a With respect to that portion of property zoned MF -12 which will front on the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road, a twenty (20) foot natural buffer will be maintained along the frontage of the newly realigned Cooper Orbit Road. If it becomes necessary to regrade the buffer zone, the regraded area within the twenty foot buffer strip will be replanted to a planting density fifty (50) percent greater than that specified in the Little Rock landscaping ordinance. The developer has now proposed to rezone a portion of what was known as Tract "B" to PRD for development of a 45 lot, single-family subdivision. See File No. Z -6120-D, The Village on the Lakes Long -Form PRD, item no. 2 on this agenda. Allowing this expansion of additional multifamily zoning on the western perimeter of the Capitol Lakes Estates Development will not affect the zoning of the smaller tract nor will it impact any of the previously approved conditions._ The.applicant is proposing a 30 -foot wide buffer along the western edge of the 7.28± acre tract and along the southern perimeter of the tract where it is adjacent to proposed single-family lots. Since this buffer is not set aside as a separate tract, staff would prefer to see it zoned OS to assure it remains as a buffer. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested MF -12 zoning with a 30 foot OS strip to be zoned along the western perimeter of the site and along the southern perimeter of the tract where it is adjacent to the proposed single-family lots. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 3, 2001) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. One person had submitted a card indicating support for the item. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of 4 May 3, 2001 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6120-C approval of the requested MF -12 zoning with the 30.foot "OS" strip along the western perimeter and along the southern perimeter where adjacent to single-family. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. 5 June 20„ 1595 ITEM NO.: 5 Z. -5120-A Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: John L. Burnette, Trustee James E. Hathaway, Jr. Cooper Orbit Road, north of Spring Valley Manor Rezone from R-2 to MF -12 Future development of apartment project 42.58± acres Vacant, wooded SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, wooded; zoned R-2 South - Vacant, wooded; zoned R-2 East - Vacant, wooded; zoned R-2 West - vacant, wooded; zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS See additional comments in File S-1100, Capitol Lakes Estates preliminary plat. Dedicate right-of-way for Cooper Orbit Road and unnamed minor arterial per Master Street Plan. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Ellis Mountain District. The adopted Plan recommends Single Family. Staff has agreed to the addition of Low Density Multifamily in the area. This is a reconfiguration and expansion of that use. Staff can support moving the LMF from north to southeast of the intersection, but cannot support expansion of the use area. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this 42.58± acre tract from "R-2" Single Family to "MF -12" Multifamily. The rezoning request is associated with Capitol Lakes Estates preliminary plat, a 190+ acre development of which these 42.58± acres are a part (S-1100). The property is currently vacant and heavily wooded. The proposed June 2 0., 19§6 ITEM NO.: 5 Z -6120-A Cont. Multifamily property is in two tracts lying on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road, south of a proposed minor arterial street. This application is the third version of proposed multifamily zoning associated with Capitol Lakes Estates. The first version consisted of a proposal to zone 31± acres at the southeast corner of the Capitol Lakes Estates Plat from R-2 to MF -18. Staff was not supportive of the proposed density and the application drew opposition from the residents of Spring Valley Manor Subdivision which is adjacent to the south. This application was later withdrawn at the Planning Commission by the applicant. The second version consisted of a proposal to zone 33.8± acres at the intersection of the realigned Cooper Orbit Road and an as yet unnamed minor arterial street from R-2 to MF - 12. The proposed multifamily property was in two tracts, a 27± acre tract lying south of the arterial street and a 7± acre tract lying north of the arterial. The multifamily property was moved well north of the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision and residents of that neighborhood supported this version. Staff was also able to recommend approval of the application. The density had been reduced from MF -18 to MF -12. The proposed Multifamily property was basically within the body of the Capitol Lakes Estates plat with only a perimeter relationship to the Oasis Renewal Center on the north. The property was located at the intersection of a collector street and an arterial street. There was some opposition to this proposal from the Oasis Renewal Center. The Planning Commission voted to approve this application on April 25, 1996. The applicant continued to work with persons at the Oasis Renewal Center who were concerned about locating the 7+ acres of multifamily property adjacent to their site. After reaching a compromise with the Oasis people, the applicant withdrew this second application from the Hoard of Directors' agenda and filed the current (third) application. This third version now consists of a proposal to zone 42.58± acres on either side of the proposed realignment of Cooper Orbit Road from R-2 to MF -12. The proposed multifamily property is in two tracts on either side of the new alignment of Cooper Orbit Road, south of the proposed new arterial street. The 27± acre tract lying south of the arterial and west of proposed Cooper Orbit Road is the same as in the second (approved) application. The 7± acres which was approved on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) has now been moved to a point south of the arterial, on the east side of the proposed alignment of Cooper Orbit Road and increased to 14.81 acres. The 7± acres on the north side of the arterial (adjacent to the Oasis property) will remain zoned R-2 and is shown as a "reserved" tract on the Capitol Lakes Estates preliminary plat. 2 June 201, 1996 ITEM NO.: 5 z -6120-A Cont.' This third proposal is basically a reconfiguration of the multifamily zoning approved through the second application and, as such, staff is able to support the application but for one issue. Through each application, the area proposed for multifamily has steadily increased from 31± acres to 33.8± acres to the current 42.58± acres. Staff can support moving the smaller tract of multifamily from north of the proposed arterial street to southeast of the intersection of the arterial and realigned Cooper orbit Road; however we cannot support increasing the area of this tract from 7± acres to 14.81 acres as is proposed. The Ellis Mountain District Land Use Plan currently recommends Single Family for this site. Staff has agreed to the addition of Low Density Multifamily in the area and the Commission voted to amend the Plan based on the previous application. If the applicant were to reduce the acreage of multifamily to that previously approved, staff could support an amendment in the Plan this time as well. STAFF RECOMMENDATYDN Staff recommends denial of the application, as filed. Staff recommends that the 14.81 acres proposed for multifamily on the east side of the proposed alignment of Cooper orbit Road be reduced to 7± acres, bring the total acreage proposed for multifamily closer to the 34± acres as was previously approved by the Commission on April 25, 1996. The applicant should also amend the plat for Capitol Lakes Estates (5-1100) to reflect single family development for the balance of the 14.81 acres. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 20, 1996) Jeff Hathaway and William Dean were present representing the application. There were two objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial. Staff also gave a brief history of the three different multifamily zoning proposals related to the Capitol Lakes Estates Development. Commissioner Lichty asked why staff was opposed to the increase in acreage proposed for multifamily zoning. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, and Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, responded. They pointed out concerns about increased traffic, inadequate streets accessing this area and the fact that there was no specific development proposed which might provide an opportunity to address questions about density. Mr. Lawson also noted that the residents of Spring valley Manor had supported the previous application but were 3 June 2 0'41 19 9,6 ITEM NO.: 5 Z -6120-A Cont. ' concerned about this most recent proposal which moved the proposed multifamily property closer to their neighborhood. Jeff Hathaway addressed the Commission in support of the application. He presented a drawing and accompanying text showing Capitol Lakes Estates and listing several reasons for the Commission to approve the multifamily zoning. He stated that this third proposal was an attempt to address the concerns raised in the two previous applications by the residents of Spring Valley Manor and persons representing the Oasis Renewal Center. Mr. Hathaway stated that the 13± acres on the east side of the proposed alignment of Cooper Orbit Road was dictated by such things as topography, right- of-way and stormwater detention. He then discussed the 8 points in the written text which he had presented to the Commission. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Hathaway noted that a portion of the eastern tract would be a lake, reducing the buildable acreage available. Commissioner Putnam asked how much net -usable acreage was available in the eastern tract, taking into account the right-of-way and lake feature. Mr. Dean responded that the net -usable acreage was less than the multifamily acreage which was previously approved on the north side of the proposed arterial street. Mr. Lawson noted that the entire 14.81± acres was proposed for multifamily and that figure would be used in computing the density of apartments to be developed on the site. Mr. Lawson stated that staff and the Spring valley neighborhood were concerned about the number of units to be developed on the site and what sort of traffic those units would generate. Commissioner Hawn asked why the plan had been changed from that which had been previously approved by the Commission. Mr. Hathaway responded that there was serious opposition from the Oasis Renewal Center and the applicant chose to try to accommodate them. Commissioner Hawn also noted that the multifamily acreage had continued to grow. Commissioner McCarthy complemented the applicant for working with the Oasis Center and asked Mr. Hathaway to discuss the proposed density of apartments on the site. Mr. Hathaway responded that he could not provide numbers since the project had not yet reached the design stage. Commissioner McCarthy asked if it was the applicant's intention to use the property to its maximum capability to provide for development as apartments. Mr. Hathaway responded that the physical limitations of the site would probably not allow for development of the site at its full density. Commissioner Putnam asked if the eastern site could be zoned so as to have a density of 8 units per acre. Mr. Lawson responded that it was up to the applicant to propose such a condition. 4