HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6532-F Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -6532 -
NAME: The Villas at Chenal Long -form PD -R
LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal
Valley Drive
DEVELOPER:
Pickering-Allwine, LLC
11600 Chenal Parkway, Suite 3
Little Rock, AR 72211
Fr\IrINIPPP-
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 14.12 acres
CURRENT ZONING:
ALLOWED USES:
PROPOSED ZONING
PROPOSED USE:
NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
I
Retirement Village
Revised PD -R
Multi -family housing
FT. NEW STREET: 2,060 LF
VARIANCESIVIIAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from Section 29-186 (c) and (d) to
allow advanced grading to future phases with the development of the first phase.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 18,163 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 20,
1999, rezoned the site from R-2 and MF -18 to PD -R to allow the establishment of a
Planned Residential Development titled Arkansas Teachers Retirement Village —
Long -form PD -R. The proposal included the rezoning of 71.9 acres from R-2 and
MF -18 to PD -R to allow for the development of the Arkansas Teachers Retirement
Village, a stepped -care retirement facility. The development .would house retired
persons with facilities including independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing
facilities and Alzheimer facilities.
FILE NO.: 7-6532-F Cont.
A single access point from Chenal Valley Drive was proposed, with a fire lane access at
the southwest corner of the property. The proposed site plan indicated a large amount
of green space, which was to be undisturbed, along with a proposed lake, walking trails
and a lakeside pavilion.
In March of 2002, the Arkansas Teachers Retirement System decided to reevaluate the
project and did not develop the site as proposed. ATRS decided to proceed with
excavating to the finished grade indicated and approved on the site grading plan,
extending sewer lines to the site, drainage construction, seeding and erosion control,
power and telephone utility crossing the site were installed underground and no
additional trees were to be removed from the site except those necessary to install
utilities. A restoration plan was submitted to the City for approval. The applicant
adhered to City's requirements in the restoration of the site and the developer's
obligations were met.
A proposal was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Little Rock Planning
Commission at their August 26, 2004, Public Hearing to allow two of the indicated lots to
develop with the retirement village concept. The applicant proposed the development
of the site with eight individual lots through a preliminary plat in conjunction with the
request to revise the PD -R zoning. The applicant indicated Lot 2 would be developed
as an assisted living facility. Proposed Lot 8 was indicated for garden style patio
homes. The applicant also indicated all uses would remain similar to the multi -unit
residential retirement facility as approved on the original PD -R. The request was
approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors on October 5, 2004, by the adoption of
Ordinance No. 19,195. Lot 8 has not developed.
Ordinance No. 19,220 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on November 1,
2004, revised the previously approved PD -R to allow a nursing and rehabilitation center
to locate on Lot 6. Chenal Nursing and Rehabilitation Center proposed a 114 bed
skilled nursing facility. The development included 90 staff positions which included
Arkansas Hospice Staff.
October 17, 2006, Ordinance No. 19,611 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors
on October 17, 2006, approved a revision to the PD -R for Lot 6 to increase the number
of beds allowed in the nursing home facility from 114 to 140. The site plan included the
placement of 93 parking spaces to serve the facility. There were no other changes to
the previously approved PD -R proposed.
An item to allow the development of this site (Lot 8) with single-family development of
attached and detached homes was withdrawn at the Commission's January 14, 2010,
public hearing. The proposal did not comply with the covenants issued on this site and
could not receive approval of the persons hiving oversight of the covenants.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT'S STATEMENT:
The project contains approximately 18.47 acres and is located at the northwest
corner of Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal Heights Drive. The developer is
proposing a gated residential neighborhood of multi -family housing.
2
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F (Cont.
The development will be enclosed by a six foot tall wall/fence with eight foot
columns. The request includes a variance from the City's Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the site with the issuance of a building
permit for Phase I. The request also includes a waiver of the City's Stormwater
Detention Ordinance.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant site and most of the interior trees were cleared as a part of
the original approval. The applicant did replant several interior trees and reseed
the site as a part of the restoration plan. A regional detention facility is located
near Chenal Valley Drive. The nursing home and the assisted living facility are
complete and occupied. Northwest of the City is a City of Little Rock Fire Station.
South of the site is the Village at Rahling Road Shopping Center. West of the
site are two multi -family developments fronting Chenal Valley Drive.
Chenal Valley Drive has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard with
curb and gutter. There is not a sidewalk in place along the property frontage.
Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal Heights Circle have been constructed with
curb and gutter.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of informational phone calls from
area residents. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the
Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS -
1. From the entrance to Legacy Circle to Legacy Lane to the cul-de-sac the
street should be constructed to a width of 26 feet.
2. Per the Master Street Plan, parking is restricted to one side of the street on
a 24 foot wide street. Show on the plan now and on the final plat and bill of
assurance, the area along the street where parking is allowed.
3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along all
26 feet wide streets.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
�l
FILE NO.: Z-6532-F(Cont.)
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. Since advanced
grading is desired a variance should be requested.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. A variance
for stormwater detention cannot be recommended for approval by staff.
7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
8. Several utilities are shown to exist under the proposed structure locations.
9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
10. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide
plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior
to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813
(Steve Philpott) for more information.
11. Driveway widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements
of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not exceed
36 feet. A turnaround must be provided for a SU -30 vehicle. The key pad
must be located at least 30 feet from the curb line on Chenal Valley Drive.
The gates should be moved to Legacy Circle. If you have any questions,
please contact Bill Henry in Traffic Engineering at 379-1816.
12. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets
unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims
for operations on private property.
13. If residential waste collection is desired, turn grounds or hammerheads at
least 80 feet in length and 20 feet wide should be provided on Legacy Circle
and Legacy Lane.
14. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight
distance at the intersection of Legacy Boulevard and Chenal Valley Drive
comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension is required with easements for this project.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Enter : No comment received.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
.19
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F Cont.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. CAW has an existing 12 -inch
main easement in an easement running through the property. Please submit
plans for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions
may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by
Central Arkansas Water, the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering
Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. This development will have
minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities
will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Additional fire
hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain
information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact
Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). A
Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to
this project in addition to normal charges. If there are facilities that need to be
adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be
done at the expense of the developer.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. The development must provide a
secondary emergency access. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for
additional information.
County Planning.: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The applicant
has applied for a rezoning for a Planned Development Residential to allow the
development of a gated community with 110 units of multi -family housing. This
request falls within the density allowed per the Land Use classification. The
overall density proposed is 5.95 units per acre. This area is not covered by a
Neighborhood Action Plan.
Master Street Plan: Chenal Valley Drive is a Collector. The primary function of a
Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. Chenal
Heights Drive is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to
provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-
residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as
"Commercial Streets". These streets have a design standard the same as a
Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require
street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
101
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F Cont.
Bicycle Plan: A Class II bikeway is shown along Chenal Valley Drive. A Class II
bikeway is located on the street as either a five foot (5) shoulder or six foot (6)
marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. Screening will be required where adjacent to single-family zoned or used
property. Screening may be accomplished by the placement of a fence or
wall six feet in height or by the placement of natural foliage to meet the
screening requirement.
3. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (March 18, 2010)
Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the
request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a
number of outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the
Commission acting on the request. Staff questioned the construction materials,
floor plan and if the units were owner or renter occupied. Staff also stated the
development was proposed as a townhouse development as defined by the
Subdivision Ordinance. Staff requested Mr. White provide a note on the site plan
indicating the proposed open space both public and private. Staff also
questioned if interior fences would be allowed.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the entrance at Legacy
Circle to Legacy Lane should be constructed with 26 feet of pavement. Staff
stated in areas where streets were constructed with 24 feet of pavement parking
would be restricted to one side. Staff requested Mr. White note on the site plan
the area proposed for restricted parking. Staff stated several utilities were shown
to exist under the proposed structures. Mr. White stated the affected utilities
would be relocated. Staff stated residential waste collection service would only
be provided within the development if the property owners association signed a
waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. Staff stated the
entrance drive did not comply with the typical ordinance standards and must not
exceed 36 feet in width.
Staff noted there were no additional landscaping comments since the
development was proposed as a single-family townhouse development.
[ol
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F Cont.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
Mr. Joe White submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at
the March 18, 2010, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
amended the request from a townhouse development to a multi -family
development. Lots are no longer being proposed for the development. The
interior drive has been indicated 26 -feet in width. A note on the site plan
indicates private garbage collection will be utilized.
The applicant has provided elevations for the proposed units. The units are
proposed to be constructed of a variety of construction materials including brick,
siding, stucco, rock and precast accents to add visual interest to the
neighborhood. The roofs are proposed with various degrees of pitches also to
add visual interest to the development. The units range in size from
1,350 square feet of 1,530 square feet of heated and cooled space. Each of the
units will have a garage serving one or two cars. Parking will also be provided
within the driveway for each unit. Each of the units will be provided an outdoor
patio area. The interior fences will be allowed with a maximum height of six feet
and constructed of wood, wrought iron or vinyl.
The site plan indicates a 25 foot building setback along Chenal Heights Drive and
Chenal Valley Drive. The building setback along the interior streets is indicated
at 15 feet. The site contains 18.48 acres and of the total area 5.20 acres is
indicated as open space. The development is indicated as Residential Low
Intensity on the City's Future Land Use Plan. This classification allowed for
single-family homes at a density not to exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
Such residential development is typically characterized by conventional single-
family homes, but may also include patio or garden homes and cluster homes,
provided that the density remain less than six (6) units per acre. The
development is proposed with 5.95 units per acres.
The minimum street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive should be 30 -feet and the
minimum street buffer along Chenal Height Drive should be 18 feet. The site
plan indicates a minimum building setback of 25 feet along Chenal Heights Drive
which allows for an adequate street buffer. The setback along Chenal Valley
Drive is indicated also at 25 feet. The development is proposed with a six foot
brick fence within this area placed on the right of way line. Staff is supportive of
the street buffer as indicated. The land use buffer along the western perimeter is
indicated at 45 feet. Within the buffer is a retaining wall which the site plan states
will not exceed 15 feet in height. The applicant is requesting to grade within the
7
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F {Cont.
required land use buffer. Staff is supportive of the request. Within the past few
years this site was cleared from property line to property line so presently there is
not any substantial growth within the buffer area.
The site plan indicates the placement of identification signage on both wall faces
entering the development. The sign is indicated with a maximum height of six
feet and a maximum sign area of thirty-two square feet. Per the zoning
ordinance multi -family developments are allowed one subdivision identification
sign with a maximum sign height of six feet and a maximum sign area of
thirty-two (32) square feet. Staff recommends the signage be limited to that as
allowed in multi -family zones.
The Declaration of Covenants for this property states no part of the subdivision
shall be used for any use other than multi -unit residential retirement facilities
without the consent of Deltic Timber Corporation. According to the developer the
units will be market as rental units to persons 55 years plus.
The request includes advanced grading of multiple phases with the development
of the first phase. The applicant has indicated the request is necessary to
balance the site and to eliminate the need for hauling out excess material and
hauling in fill material during the subsequent development phases.
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the City's stormwater detention ordinance
requirements. Staff is not supportive of this request. Staff feels the developers
should provide detention on site as typically required by ordinance.
Staff is supportive of the request. The development is proposed as a multi -family
development developed with an architectural style to allow the units to have
individuality. According to the developer the units will be marketed to residents
55 years and older who want to maintain independence but no longer want to
maintain a large home. The development is proposed with a density consistent
with the City's Future Land Use Plan. To staff's knowledge there are no
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the
development of the site with the development as proposed is appropriate for the
site.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request Subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive and
Chenal Heights Drive as proposed and the western land use buffer as proposed.
Staff recommends the development signage located on Chenal Valley Drive be
limited to one identification sign as allowed in the multi -family zones.
M
FILE NO.: Z-6532-F(Cont.)
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow grading of future phases with the development of the first
phase.
Staff recommends the applicant provide stormwater detention as required by City
ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 8, 2010)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the owners.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
applicant had submitted a request on April 6, 2010, requesting a deferral of this item to
the May 20, 2010. public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a
waiver of the Commission's By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff
stated they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by
staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff with a few minor changes from the
previously reviewed plan. The development contains 18.48 acres and is proposed with
the development of 109 units of multi -family housing in 29 buildings. The units are
proposed as one (1) and two (2) story unite with a maximum building height of 30 feet.
The development will allow interior fences with a maximum height of six (6) feet
constructed of materials consisting of wood and/or iron.
From the original submission one unit has been removed, a park area has been added
and a trail from the rear of the development to the clubhouse has been added. Also the
street accessing the cul-de-sac now meanders to act as a traffic calming device.
Another change from the original submission is the center residential units will have
alley access to rear loaded garages allowing the fronts of the buildings to have front
yard areas. The perimeter units will still have front loaded garages but the buildings will
be designed to minimize the garages and concrete drives.
In the staff analysis staff stated the site had previously been cleared from property line
to property line. This is an incorrect statement. The existing buffer on the west side
varies from 90 feet to 190 feet. Most of the buffer on the north has already been
cleared and filled.
Per the buffer ordinance the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive should average
40 feet and in no case less than 20 feet. The street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive is
9
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F Cont.
indicated at 25 feet. This street buffer does not comply with the typically ordinance
requirement. The street buffer along Chenal Heights Drive should average 24 feet and
in no case be less than 12 feet. The street buffer along Chenal Heights Drive appears
to comply with the typical ordinance requirement. The land use buffer along the
western perimeter should average 50 feet and a minimum of 70 percent of the buffer
should remain undisturbed. The minimum land use buffer along the western perimeter
is a minimum of 30 feet and in most cases the buffer is 45 to 50 feet. The site plan
indicates the placement of a retaining wall within a portion of the buffer area reducing
the width to 30 feet for approximately 275 feet. Staff feels the applicant can take
measures to ensure the buffer area remains undisturbed as required by the ordinance
and there is adequate area to allow the average width of the buffer to comply with the
buffer ordinance requirements.
Staff is supportive of the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive as proposed. The
development is proposed with a brick perimeter fence. The buildings will have a 25 -foot
rear yard setback. This setback is typical for a residential rear yard setback.
Staff continues to support the development and the associated variances. The
development is proposed with an overall density of 5.89 units per acre. The site is
indicated as Residential Low Intensity on the City's Future Land Use Plan which allows
for development of homes at a density not to exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff
also recommends approval of the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal
Heights Drive as proposed and the western land use buffer as proposed. Staff
recommends the development signage located on Chenal Valley Drive be limited to one
identification sign as allowed in the multi -family zones. Staff recommends approval of
the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of future
phases with the development of the first phase and staff recommends the applicant
provide stormwater detention as required by City ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 20, 2010)
The applicant and his representatives were present representing the request. There
was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation
of approval of the item along with the associated variances. Staff also presented a
recommendation stormwater detention be provided per the ordinance.
Mr. Stewart Headley addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicants. He stated
his clients were seeking approval for a multi -family development and requested the
Commission approve the request as recommended by staff. He yielded the remainder
of his time for rebuttal.
Mr. Spivey provided the Commission with background information concerning the
property and agreements entered into by Arkansas Teachers Retirement System and
W]
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F Cont.
Deltic at the time of sale. He stated the original approval allowed all streets to be
private and internal. He stated there was to be one access to Chenal Valley Drive from
the development. Mr. Spivey stated the original agreement did not in vision the creation
of lots but the development contained on a single tract. Mr. Spivey stated there had
been two revisions to the original PD -R which did allow the creation of lots. He stated
with the creation of lots two public streets were created, constructed and dedicated to
the City. Mr. Spivey stated the single access to Chenal Valley Drive with the
intersecting street remained. He stated the construction which had occurred along
Chenal Valley Drive had been constructed with a minimum setback of 40 feet. He
stated the developments which were located along Chenal Valley Drive were not
enclosed with a brick walled fence. Mr. Spivey stated the developers had not met with
Deltic or the Chenal Valley Architectural Control Committee (ACC) concerning the
proposed development. He questioned if the ACC would approve the site plan as
presented to the Commission. Mr. Spivey stated the building as proposed did not
provide for proper setbacks or buffers. He stated the perimeter fence would create an
undesirable tunnel effect along the frontage of the property which was inconsistent with
other properties in the area. Mr. Spivey stated the developers had not committed to
Deltic the development would be age restricted. He requested the Commission defer
the item to allow the ACC to review the request and determine if the ACC would support
the development or if there were modifications the Commission was reviewing a plan
that could be constructed.
Mr. Headley stated the access point from Chenal Valley Drive met the ordinance
standards for driveway spacing. He stated the original PD -R had been abandoned and
the restrictions placed on the original PD -R no longer applied to the development of the
site. He stated the developer was willing to increase the buffer to 33 -feet along Chenal
Valley Drive. He stated the typical setback for single-family development along a
collector street was 30 -feet. He stated the fence along Chenal Valley Drive would be
brick and iron. He stated the approval of the ACC should not have any impact on the
Commission's decision as to the approval of the site plan. He stated the agreement
was a private document between the property owners and Deltic. He stated the
Commission could review Bills of Assurances but were not bound by them.
Mr. David Pickering addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated
he was a home builder in Chenal and had been before the ACC a number of times. He
stated the review by the ACC was subjective. He stated the ACC made suggestions on
design items related to the architecture of the structure but did not deal with how the site
would develop. He stated the development was single story patio homes. He stated
the site was no longer a 71 -acre tract. There were different owners and different
development patterns in the area.
Chairman Yates questioned Mr. Pickering if he could legally build the plan presently
presented to the Commission without ACC approval. Mr. Pickering stated he felt the
ACC would approve the request. Chairman Yates question Joe White,'Jr., the engineer
of record and a member of the ACC review board if Mr. Pickering could build the
development without ACC approval. Mr. White stated he did not feel the development
could be constructed without ACC approval.
11
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F (Cont.
Mr. Pickering requested the item be deferred to the July 1, 2010, public hearing to allow
the item to be presented to the ACC for review and approval. A motion was made to
defer the item as requested by the applicant. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes,
0 noes and 5 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has met with the Chenal Design Review Committee and is working on
suggestions and changes to the site plan. As of this printing these changes have not
been received by staff. Some of the changes include increasing the building setbacks
and buffer areas along Chenal Valley Drive and the northern perimeter, eliminating the
entrance from Chenal Valley Drive and relocating the office and pool house. Staff will
provide the Commission with an updated staff review and recommendation at the public
hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 1, 2010)
Mr. Gregory Hopkins was present representing the applicant. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had revised the site
plan reducing the number of units from 109 to 102, relocated the entrance drive from
Chenal Valley Drive to Chenal Heights Drive and increased the setbacks along Chenal
Valley Drive and the land use buffers along the north. Staff stated of the 102 units there
was a mix of front loaded and rear loaded garages. Staff stated there were 72 front
loaded units and 30 rear loaded units. Staff stated the open space areas had been
increased due to the decrease in unit density. Staff stated there was a 40 foot buffer
along Chenal Valley Drive with a 25 foot buffer along Chenal Heights Drive. Staff stated
the unit which was previously indicated with a 15 foot setback from the northern
boundary had been moved to approximately 40 feet.
Staff stated they continued to support the request. Staff stated the original approval for
the Teachers Retirement Community allowed for a step living community. Staff stated
they felt the development as proposed offered a component of the original approval.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with
the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff
report.
Mr. Gregory Hopkins stated the developers did have approval from the Chenal
architectural review committee. He stated there were two conditions placed on the
developer which would be adhered to during the development process. He stated one
was related to buffers and the second related to design issues. He stated the developer
had worked with Deltic and they were in agreement with the items Deltic was requesting
of the developer related to age restriction.
12
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F {Cont.
Mr. Bill Spivey addressed the Commission stating the applicant had met with the
architectural review committee and with Deltic and all were somewhat in agreement on
a number of the issues raised before the Commission at their May 20, 2010 public
hearing. He stated the developer had agreed to follow the federal guidelines with regard
to the age limitations placed on the potential residents. He stated the developer had
also agreed to place a covenant on the property to ensure these limitations were
followed.
There was no discussion by the Commission. Chairman Yates entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and
4 absent.
13
July 1, 2010
ITE N1 NO.: C FILE Na.: Z -6532-F
NAME: The Villas at Chenal Long -form PD -R
LOCATION_: Located on the Northeast corner of Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal
Valley Drive
DEVELOPER:
Pickering-Allwine, LLC
11600 Chenal Parkway, Suite 3
Little 'Rock, AR 72211
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 14.12 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 2,060 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PD -R
ALLOWED USES
PROPOSED ZONING:
PROPOSED USE
Retirement Village
Revised PD -R
Multi -family housing
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from Section 29-186 (c) and (d) to
allow advanced grading to future phases with the development of the first phase.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 18,163 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 20,
1999, rezoned the site from R-2 and MF -18 to PD -R to allow the establishment of a
Planned Residential Development titled Arkansas Teachers Retirement Village —
Long -form PD -R. The proposal included the rezoning of 71.9 acres from R-2 and
MF -18 to PD -R to allow for the development of the Arkansas Teachers Retirement
Village, a stepped -care retirement facility. The development would house retired
persons with facilities including independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing
facilities and Alzheimer facilities.
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
A single access point from Chenal Valley Drive was proposed, with a fire lane access at
the southwest corner of the property. The proposed site plan indicated a large amount
of green space, which was to be undisturbed, along with a proposed lake, walking trails
and a lakeside pavilion.
In March of 2002, the Arkansas Teachers Retirement System decided to reevaluate the
project and did not develop the site as proposed. ATRS decided to proceed with
excavating to the finished grade indicated and approved on the site grading plan,
extending sewer lines to the site, drainage construction, seeding and erosion control,
power and telephone utility crossing the site were installed underground and no
additional trees were to be removed from the site except those necessary to install
utilities. A restoration plan was submitted to the City for approval. The applicant
adhered to City's requirements in the restoration of the site and the developer's
obligations were met.
A proposal was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Little Rock Planning
Commission at their August 26, 2004, Public Hearing to allow two of the indicated lots to
develop with the retirement village concept. The applicant proposed the development
of the site with eight individual lots through a preliminary plat in conjunction with the
request to revise the PD -R zoning. The applicant indicated Lot 2 would be developed
as an assisted living facility. Proposed Lot 8 was indicated for garden style patio
homes. The applicant also indicated all uses would remain similar to the multi -unit
residential retirement facility as approved on the original PD -R. The request was
approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors on October 5, 2004, by the adoption of
Ordinance No. 19,195. Lot 8 has not developed.
Ordinance No. 19,220 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on November 1,
2004, revised the previously approved PD -R to allow a nursing and rehabilitation center
to locate on Lot 6. Chenal Nursing and Rehabilitation Center proposed a 114 bed
skilled nursing facility. The development included 90 staff positions which included
Arkansas Hospice Staff.
October 17, 2006, Ordinance No. 19,611 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors
on October 17, 2006, approved a revision to the PD -R for Lot 6 to increase the number
of beds allowed in the nursing home facility from 114 to 140. The site plan included the
placement of 93 parking spaces to serve the facility. There were no other changes to
the previously approved PD -R proposed.
An item to allow the development of this site (Lot 8) with single-family development of
attached and detached homes was withdrawn at the Commission's January 14, 2010,
public hearing. The proposal did not comply with the covenants issued on this site and
could not receive approval of the persons having oversight of the covenants.
2
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6532-
A. PROPOSALIREQUEST/APPLICANT'S STATEMENT:
The project contains approximately 18.47 acres and is located at the northwest
corner of Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal Heights Drive. The developer is
proposing a gated residential neighborhood of multi -family housing.
The development will be enclosed by a six foot tall wall/fence with eight foot
columns. The request includes a variance from the City's Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the site with the issuance of a building
permit for Phase I. The request also includes a waiver of the City's Stormwater
Detention Ordinance.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant site and most of the interior trees were cleared as a part of
the original approval. The applicant did replant several interior trees and reseed
the site as a part of the restoration plan. A regional detention facility is located
near Chenal Valley Drive. The nursing home and the assisted living facility are
complete and occupied. Northwest of the City is a City of Little Rock Fire Station.
South of the site is the Village at Rahling Road Shopping Center. West of the
site are two multi -family developments fronting Chenal Valley Drive.
Chenal Valley Drive has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard with
curb and gutter. There is not a sidewalk in place along the property frontage.
Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal Heights Circle have been constructed with
curb and gutter.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of informational phone calls from
area residents. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the
Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. From the entrance to Legacy Circle to Legacy Lane to the cul-de-sac the
street should be constructed to a width of 26 feet.
2. Per the Master Street Plan, parking is restricted to one side of the street on
a 24 foot wide street. Show on the plan now and on the final plat and bill of
assurance, the area along the street where parking is allowed.
9
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along all
26 feet wide streets.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. Since advanced
grading is desired a variance should be requested.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. A variance
for stormwater detention cannot be recommended for approval by staff.
7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
8. Several utilities are shown to exist under the proposed structure locations.
9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
10. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide
plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior
to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813
(Steve Philpott) for more information.
11. Driveway widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements
of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not exceed
36 feet. A turnaround must be provided for a SU -30 vehicle. The key pad
must be located at least 30 feet from the curb line on Chenal Valley Drive.
The gates should be moved to Legacy Circle. If you have any questions,
please contact Bill Henry in Traffic Engineering at 379-1816.
12. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets
unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims
for operations on private property.
13. If residential waste collection is desired, turn arounds or hammerheads at
least 80 feet in length and 20 feet wide should be provided on Legacy Circle
and Legacy Lane.
14. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight
distance at the intersection of Legacy Boulevard and Chenal Valley Drive
comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards.
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension is required with easements for this project.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Enerav: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. CAW has an existing 12 -inch
main easement in an easement running through the property. Please submit
plans for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions
may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by
Central Arkansas Water, the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering
Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. This development will have
minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities
will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Additional fire
hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain
information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact
Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). A
Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to
this project in addition to normal charges. If there are facilities that need to be
adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be
done at the expense of the developer.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. The development must provide a
secondary emergency access. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for
additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The applicant
has applied for a rezoning for a Planned Development Residential to allow the
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
development of a gated community with 110 units of multi -family housing. This
request falls within the density allowed per the Land Use classification. The
overall density proposed is 5.95 units per acre. This area is not covered by a
Neighborhood Action Plan.
Master Street Plan: Chenal Valley Drive is a Collector. The primary function of a
Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. Chenal
Heights Drive is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to
provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-
residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as
"Commercial Streets". These streets have a design standard the same as a
Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require
street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: A Class II bikeway is shown along Chenal Valley Drive. A Class II
bikeway is located on the street as either a five foot (5) shoulder or six foot (6)
marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. Screening will be required where adjacent to single-family zoned or used
property. Screening may be accomplished by the placement of a fence or
wall six feet in height or by the placement of natural foliage to meet the
screening requirement.
3. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
& SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(March 18, 2010)
Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the
request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a
number of outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the
Commission acting on the request. Staff questioned the construction materials,
floor plan and if the units were owner or renter occupied. Staff also stated the
development was proposed as a townhouse development as defined by the
Subdivision Ordinance. Staff requested Mr. White provide a note on the site plan
indicating the proposed open space both public and private. Staff also
questioned if interior fences would be allowed.
Cei
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the entrance at Legacy
Circle to Legacy Lane should be constructed with 26 feet of pavement. Staff
stated in areas where streets were constructed with 24 feet of pavement parking
would be restricted to one side. Staff requested Mr. White note on the site plan
the area proposed for restricted parking. Staff stated several utilities were shown
to exist under the proposed structures. Mr. White stated the affected utilities
would be relocated. Staff stated residential waste collection service would only
be provided within the development if the property owners association signed a
waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. Staff stated the
entrance drive did not comply with the typical ordinance standards and must not
exceed 36 feet in width.
Staff noted there were no additional landscaping comments since the
development was proposed as a single-family townhouse development.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
Mr. Joe White submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at
the March 18, 2010, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
amended the request from a townhouse development to a multi -family
development. Lots are no longer being proposed for the development. The
interior drive has been indicated 26 -feet in width. A note on the site plan
indicates private garbage collection will be utilized.
The applicant has provided elevations for the proposed units. The units are
proposed to be constructed of a variety of construction materials including brick,
siding, stucco, rock and precast accents to add visual interest to the
neighborhood. The roofs are proposed with various degrees of pitches also to
add visual interest to the development. The units range in size from
1,350 square feet of 1,530 square feet of heated and cooled space. Each of the
units will have a garage serving one or two cars. Parking will also be provided
within the driveway for each unit. Each of the units will be provided an outdoor
patio area. The interior fences will be allowed with a maximum height of six feet
and constructed of wood, wrought iron or vinyl.
The site plan indicates a 25 foot building setback along Chenal Heights Drive and
Chenal Valley Drive. The building setback along the interior streets is indicated
at 15 feet. The site contains 18.48 acres and of the total area 5.20 acres is
7
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
indicated as open space. The development is indicated as Residential Low
Intensity on the City's Future Land Use Plan. This classification allowed for
single-family homes at a density not to exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
Such residential development is typically characterized by conventional single-
family homes, but may also include patio or garden homes and cluster homes,
provided that the density remain less than six (6) units per acre. The
development is proposed with 5.95 units per acres.
The minimum street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive should be 30 -feet and the
minimum street buffer along Chenal Height Drive should be 18 feet. The site
plan indicates a minimum building setback of 25 feet along Chenal Heights Drive
which allows for an adequate street buffer. The setback along Chenal Valley
Drive is indicated also at 25 feet. The development is proposed with a six foot
brick fence within this area placed on the right of way line. Staff is supportive of
the street buffer as indicated. The land use buffer along the western perimeter is
indicated at 45 feet. Within the buffer is a retaining wall which the site plan states
will not exceed 15 feet in height. The applicant is requesting to grade within the
required land use buffer. Staff is supportive of the request. Within the past few
years this site was cleared from property line to property line so presently there is
not any substantial growth within the buffer area.
The site plan indicates the placement of identification signage on both wall faces
entering the development. The sign is indicated with a maximum height of six
feet and a maximum sign area of thirty-two square feet. Per the zoning
ordinance multi -family developments are allowed one subdivision identification
sign with a maximum sign height of six feet and a maximum sign area of
thirty-two (32) square feet. Staff recommends the signage be limited to that as
allowed in multi -family zones.
The Declaration of Covenants for this property states no part of the subdivision
shall be used for any use other than multi -unit residential retirement facilities
without the consent of Deltic Timber Corporation. According to the developer the
units will be market as rental units to persons 55 years plus.
The request includes advanced grading of multiple phases with the development
of the first phase. The applicant has indicated the request is necessary to
balance the site and to eliminate the need for hauling out excess material and
hauling in fill material during the subsequent development phases.
The applicant is requesting.a waiver of the City's stormwater detention ordinance
requirements. Staff is not supportive of this request. Staff feels the developers
should provide detention on site as typically required by ordinance.
n.
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
Staff is supportive of the request. The development is proposed as a multi -family
development developed with an architectural style to allow the units to have
individuality. According to the developer the units will be marketed to residents
55 years and older who want to maintain independence but no longer want to
maintain a large home. The development is proposed with a density consistent
with the City's Future Land Use Plan. To staff's knowledge there are no
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the
development of the site with the development as proposed is appropriate for the
site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive and
Chenal Heights Drive as proposed and the western land use buffer as proposed.
Staff recommends the development signage located on Chenal Valley Drive be
limited to one identification sign as allowed in the multi -family zones.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow grading of future phases with the development of the first
phase.
Staff recommends the applicant provide stormwater detention as required by City
ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 8, 2010)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the owners.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
applicant had submitted a request on April 6, 2010, requesting a deferral of this item to
the May 20, 2010, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a
waiver of the Commission's By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff,
stated they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by
staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
9
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.
STAFF UPDATE:
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff with a few minor changes from the
previously reviewed plan. The development contains 18.48 acres and is proposed with
the development of 109 units of multi -family housing in 29 buildings. The units are
proposed as one (1) and two -(2) story units with a maximum building height of 30 feet.
The development will allow interior fences with a maximum height of six (6) feet
constructed of materials consisting of wood and/or iron.
From the original submission one unit has been removed, a park area has been added
and a trail from the rear of the development to the clubhouse has been added. Also the
street accessing the cul-de-sac now meanders to act as a traffic calming device.
Another change from the original submission is the center residential units will have
alley access to rear loaded garages allowing the fronts of the buildings to have front
yard areas. The perimeter units will still have front loaded garages but the buildings will
be designed to minimize the garages and concrete drives.
In the staff analysis staff stated the site had previously been cleared from property line
to property line. This is an incorrect statement. The existing buffer on the west side
varies from 90 feet to 190 feet. Most of the buffer on the north has already been
cleared and filled.
Per the buffer ordinance the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive should average
40 feet and in no case less than 20 feet. The street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive is
indicated at 25 feet. This street buffer does not comply with the typically ordinance
requirement. The street buffer along Chenal Heights Drive should average 24 feet and
in no case be less than 12 feet. The street buffer along Chenal Heights Drive appears
to comply with the typical ordinance requirement. The land use buffer along the
western perimeter should average 50 feet and a minimum of 70 percent of the buffer
should remain undisturbed. The minimum land use buffer along the western perimeter
is a minimum of 30 feet and in most cases the buffer is 45 to 50 feet. The site plan
indicates the placement of a retaining wall within a portion of the buffer area reducing
the width to 30 feet for approximately 275 feet. Staff feels the applicant can take
measures to ensure the buffer area remains undisturbed as required by the ordinance
and there is adequate area to allow the average width of the buffer to comply with the
buffer ordinance requirements.
Staff is supportive of the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive as proposed. The
development is proposed with a brick perimeter fence. The buildings will have a 25 -foot
rear yard setback. This setback is typical for a residential rear yard setback.
Staff continues to support the development and the associated variances. The
development is proposed with an overall density of 5.89 units per acre. The site is
indicated as Residential Low Intensity on the City's Future Land Use Plan which allows
10
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
TEM NO.: C (Co
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
for development of homes at a density not to exceed six (6) dwelling units per acre.
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff
also recommends approval of the street buffer along Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal
Heights Drive as proposed and the western land use buffer as proposed. Staff
recommends the development signage located on Chenal Valley Drive be limited to one
identification sign as allowed in the multi -family zones. Staff recommends approval of
the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of future
phases with the development of the first phase and staff recommends the applicant
provide stormwater detention as required by City ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 20, 2010)
The applicant and his representatives were present representing the request. There
was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation
of approval of the item along with the associated variances. Staff also presented a
recommendation stormwater detention be provided per the ordinance.
Mr. Stewart Headley addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicants. He stated
his clients were seeking approval for a multi -family development and requested the
Commission approve the request as recommended by staff. He yielded the remainder
of his time for rebuttal.
Mr. Spivey provided the Commission with background information concerning the
property and agreements entered into by Arkansas Teachers Retirement System and
Deltic at the time of sale. He stated the original approval allowed all streets to be
private and internal. He stated there was to be one access to Chenal Valley Drive from
the development. Mr. Spivey stated the original agreement did not in vision the creation
of lots but the development contained on a single tract. Mr. Spivey stated there had
been two revisions to the original PD -R which did allow the creation of lots. He stated
with the creation of lots two public streets were created, constructed and dedicated to
the City. Mr. Spivey stated the single access to Chenal Valley Drive with the
intersecting street remained. He stated the construction which had occurred along
Chenal Valley Drive had been constructed with a minimum setback of 40 feet. He
stated the developments which were located along Chenal Valley Drive were not
enclosed with a brick walled fence. Mr. Spivey stated the developers had not met with
Deltic or the Chenal Valley Architectural Control Committee (ACC) concerning the
proposed development. He questioned if the ACC would approve the site plan as
presented to the Commission. Mr. Spivey stated the building as proposed did not
provide for proper setbacks or buffers. He stated the perimeter fence would create an
undesirable tunnel effect along the frontage of the property which was inconsistent with
other properties in the area. Mr. Spivey stated the developers had not committed to
Deltic the development would be age restricted. He requested the Commission defer
11
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
M NO.- C (Co
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
the item to allow the ACC to review the request and determine if the ACC would support
the development or if there were modifications the Commission was reviewing a plan
that could be constructed.
Mr. Headley stated the access point from Chenal Valley Drive met the ordinance
standards for driveway spacing. He stated the original PD -R had been abandoned and
the restrictions placed on the original PD -R no longer applied to the development of the
site. He stated the developer was willing to increase the buffer to 33 -feet along Chenal
Valley Drive. He stated the typical setback for single-family development along a
collector street was 30 -feet. He stated the fence along Chenal Valley Drive would be
brick and iron. He stated the approval of the ACC should not have any impact on the
Commission's decision as to the approval of the site plan. He stated the agreement
was a private document between the property owners and Deltic. He stated the
Commission could review Bills of Assurances but were not bound by them.
Mr. David Pickering addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated
he was a home builder in Chenal and had been before the ACC a number of times. He
stated the review by the ACC was subjective. He stated the ACC made suggestions on
design items related to the architecture of the structure but did not deal with how the site
would develop. He stated the development was single story patio homes. He stated
the site was no longer a 71 -acre tract. There were different owners and different
development patterns in the area.
Chairman Yates questioned Mr. Pickering if he could legally build the plan presently
presented to the Commission without ACC approval. Mr. Pickering stated he felt the
ACC would approve the request. Chairman Yates question Joe White, Jr., the engineer
of record and a member of the ACC review board if Mr. Pickering could build the
development without ACC approval. Mr. White stated he did not feel the development
could be constructed without ACC approval.
Mr. Pickering requested the item be deferred to the July 1, 2010, public hearing to allow
the item to be presented to the ACC for review and approval. A motion was made to
defer the item as requested by the applicant. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes,
0 noes and 5 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has met with the Chenal Design Review Committee and is working on
suggestions and changes to the site plan. As of this printing these changes have not
been received by staff. Some of the changes include increasing the building setbacks
12
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
and buffer areas along Chenal Valley Drive and the northern perimeter, eliminating the
entrance from Chenal Valley Drive and relocating the office and pool house. Staff will
provide the Commission with an updated staff review and recommendation at the public
hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 1, 2010)
Mr. Gregory Hopkins was present representing the applicant. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had revised the site
plan reducing the number of units from 109 to 102, relocated the entrance drive from
Chenal Valley Drive to Chenal Heights Drive and increased the setbacks along Chenal
Valley Drive and the land use buffers along the north. Staff stated of the 102 units there
was a mix of front loaded and rear loaded garages. Staff stated there were 72 front
loaded units and 30 rear loaded units. Staff stated the open space areas had been
increased due to the decrease in unit density. Staff stated there was a 40 foot buffer
along Chenal Valley Drive with a 25 foot buffer along Chenal Heights Drive. Staff stated
the unit which was previously indicated with a 15 foot setback from the northern
boundary had been moved to approximately 40 feet.
Staff stated they continued to support the request. Staff stated the original approval for
the Teachers Retirement Community allowed for a step living community. Staff stated
they felt the development as, proposed offered a component of the original approval.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with
the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff
report.
Mr. Gregory Hopkins stated the developers did have approval from the Chenal
architectural review committee. He stated there were two conditions placed on the
developer which would be adhered to during the development process. He stated one
was related to buffers and the second related to design issues. He stated the developer
had worked with Deltic and they were in agreement with the items Deltic was requesting
of the developer related to age restriction.
Mr. Bill Spivey addressed the Commission stating the applicant had met with the
architectural review committee and with Deltic and all were somewhat in agreement on
a number of the issues raised before the Commission at their May 20, 2010 public
hearing. He stated the developer had agreed to follow the federal guidelines with regard
to the age limitations placed on the potential residents. He stated the developer had
also agreed to place a covenant on the property to ensure these limitations were
followed.
13
July 1, 2010
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO-, C (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -6532-F
There was no discussion by the Commission. Chairman Yates entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and
4 absent.
14
O.: 10.
NAME: The Villas at Chenal Long -form PD -R
Z -6532-F
LOCATION: located on the Northeast corner of Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal
Valley Drive
Planning Staff Comments:
1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 feet of the site, complete
with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of
mailing. The notice must be mailed no later than March 24, 2010. The Office of
Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than April 2,
2010.
2. Provide the height of the retaining wall on the site plan.
3. How will garbage service be provided?
4. For multi -family developments the maximum sign typically allowed in six feet in
height and thirty-two (32) square feet in area.
5. Provide a note on the site plan indicating the maximum building height proposed.
6. Will on -street parking be restricted to one side of the street? If so indicate a note on
the site plan limiting the on -street parking.
7. Will interior fences be allowed? If so provide a note on the site plan indicating the
construction materials allowed, the locations interior fences will be allowed and the
maximum heights of interior fences.
8. Provide building elevations and the proposed floor plan for the proposed structures.
9. Will the units have garages?
10. Will the units be owner occupied or renter occupied?
11. Provide the Bill of Assurance for this indicating the restrictions as noted on the site
plan.
12. The development is proposed as with townhouse lots as defined by the City's zoning
ordinance. The townhouse lot development standards are a minimum width of 22 -
feet a minimum depth of 80 -feet and a minimum lot area of 2,000 square feet. The
building lines are established on the site plan locating the generalized building
location.
13. The PD -R ordinance typically requires open space to be well designed for innovative
design and visual attractiveness. Open space shall be a minimum of ten to fifteen
percent of gross planned residential district areas and shall be common usable open
space. Townhouse developments shall have a minimum of five hundred square feet
of usable private open space per unit. Recreational facilities or structures and their
accessory uses located in common areas shall be considered as usable open space
as long as the total impervious surfaces such as paving and roofs constitute no more
than ten percent of the total open space.
14. Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal Heights Drive are classified on the Master Street
Plan as collector streets. The ordinance typically requires a 30 -foot building setback
along collector streets. The interior streets are residential streets which typically
require the placement of a 25 -foot building setback.
Item # 10.
VarianceNVaivers: A variance from Section 31-207 to allow the development of private
streets within the residential development. A variance from Section 29-186 (c) and (d)
to allow advanced grading to future phases with the development of the first phase.
Public Works Conditions:
1. From the entrance to Legacy Circle to Legacy Lane to the cul-de-sac the street
should be constructed to a width of 26 feet.
2. Per the Master Street Plan, parking is restricted to one side of the street on a 24 foot
wide street. Show on the plan now and on the final plat and bill of assurance, the
area along the street where parking is allowed.
3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section
31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along all 26 feet wide
streets.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work.
Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic
Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior
to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential
subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior
to the start of construction. Since advanced grading is desired a variance should be
requested.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. A variance for stormwater
detention cannot be recommended for approval by staff.
7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit from
the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
8. Several utilities are shown to exist under proposed structure locations.
9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering
must approve completed plans prior to construction.
10. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide plans
for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior to
platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813 (Steve
Philpott) for more information.
11. Driveway widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of
Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. A
turnaround must be provided for a SU -30 vehicle. The key pad must be located at
least 30 feet from the curb line on Chenal Valley Drive. The gates should be moved
to Legacy Circle. If you have any questions, please contact Bill Henry in Traffic
Engineering at 379-1816.
12. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets unless the
property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on
private property.
13. If residential waste collection is desired, turn arounds or hammerheads at least 80
feet in length and 20 feet wide should be provided on Legacy Circle and Legacy
Lane.
14. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the
intersection of Legacy Blvd and Chenal Valley Drive comply with 2004 AASHTO
Green Book standards.
Item # 10.
Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension is required with easements for this project.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time
of request for water service must be met. CAW HAS AN EXISTING 12 -INCH MAIN IN
AN EASEMENT RUNNING THROUGH THIS PROPERTY. Please submit plans for
water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required
after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for
installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the
Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is
required. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution
system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s)
and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the
hydrant(s). A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will
apply to this project in addition to normal charges. If there are facilities that need to be
adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done
at the expense of the developer.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. The subdivision must provide a
secondary emergency access. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional
information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The applicant has applied
for a rezoning for a Planned Development Residential to allow the development of a
gated community with 110 units of zero lot line attached housing. This request, is for
single family residences, which is in line with the Future Land Use Plan. This area is not
covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan.
Master Street Plan: Chenal Valley Drive is a Collector. The primary function of a
Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. Chenal
Heights Drive is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide
Item # 10.
access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential
zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as "Commercial
Streets". These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets
may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: A Class II bikeway is shown along Chenal Valley Drive. A Class II
bikeway is located on the street as either a five foot (6) shoulder or six foot (6) marked
bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required.
Landscape: No comment.
Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat/plan (to include
the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, March 24, 2010.
Item # 10.