Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6787 Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-6787 NAME: Southridge Office Park - Long -Form POD LOCATION: Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Southridge Drive DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Barnes Quinn Flake and Anderson White-Daters and Associates 400 W. Capitol Avenue 401 S. Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 7.15 acres ZONING: R-2 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ALLOWED USES: Single Family residential PROPOSED USE: Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-2 to POD to allow for the development of an office building. The project consists of construction of a 20,200 square foot office building (20 feet in height) within the east one-half of the property. The proposed building will have a drive-thru branch bank facility within the east portion of the building. A parking area is proposed along the south side of the proposed building containing 88 parking spaces. Two (2) access points are proposed, one from Cantrell Road and one from Southridge Dr. The applicant has noted that the west one-half of the property will not be developed and will remain undisturbed. The applicant is requesting 0-3 permitted and accessory uses for the site. The proposed hours of operation will be as follows: FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) B C 0 Bank - 8:30 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Saturday Remaining Offices - 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Saturday EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and wooded. The property slopes upward from Cantrell Road to the north. The Walton Heights Neighborhood is located immediately north of the site. There is a Little Rock Fire Station to the east across Southridge Dr., with 0-2 zoned property and a church further east. Undeveloped R-2 zoned property is located immediately west of this site, on the north side of Cantrell Road. There is a mixture of commercial uses and zoning to the south across Cantrell Road. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one (1) phone call from a person expressing concerns about this proposed development. The Walton Heights/Candlewood and Piedmont Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial, dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. 3. 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. 4. Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 7. Bank drive does not have sufficient vehicle storage. Redesign and resubmit. 8. Recommend acceleration lane from Southridge Drive to Cantrell Road. Pq FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) 9. Provide cross-sections and elevation for proposed development. 10. Construct siltation pond during construction for run- off. 11. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 12. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 13. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 14. Existing topographic information at maximum five foot contour interval 100 base flood elevation is required. 15. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186(e) is required. 16. A Grading Permit per Secs. 29-186(c) and (d) is required. 17. Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start work. 18. Cantrell Road has average daily traffic count of 25,000. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: If a 30 foot overhead power line is required, a 30 foot easement will be required. Arkla: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: On site fire protection may be required. A development fee based on the size of the connection may apply. Fire Department: No Comment. County Planning: No Comment. CATA: Site is not currently served by CATA. A sidewalk should be provided from the Cantrell entrance to the proposed building. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is in the River Mountain Planning District. The current Land Use Plan shows Transition. Development of a POD is consistent with this land use category. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, which calls for preservation of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. 3 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Landsca a Issues: The plan submitted does not appear to provide for the three foot deep building landscaping required between the public parking areas and building. Some flexibility with this requirement is allowed. Because of the grade elevation changes, cross sections of the proposed project will be required along with proposed treatment of the changes in grade. This development is required to be screened to a height of 6 feet from the adjacent residential properties to the north, east and west. This screen may be an opaque wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings with growth to 6 feet within three years. Credit toward satisfying this requirement can be given for existing vegetation which provides the year-round required screening. This is a wooded site and the City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of 6 inch caliper or larger. G. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan and a property north/south section to staff on December 6, 1999. The revised plan addresses some of the concerns as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee. The revised plan notes the dumpster location, building height and reduces the number of parking spaces from 105 to 88 spaces. The ordinance would typically require 49 parking spaces for an office development of this size. Staff supports the parking plan as proposed. The north/south section provided by the applicant notes that the vertical cut will be approximately 26 feet at the rear of the building. Two (2) retaining walls are proposed in this area. The applicant has noted that the maximum vertical cut will be approximately 30 feet at the northwest corner of the building. Any vertical cut over 30 feet requires Planning commission approval. Public Works has indicated support for the vertical cut and retaining wall construction as proposed. 4 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) The revised site plan does not show a sign location. Any ground -mounted sign must conform to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District Standards (monument -type, maximum height - six (6) feet, maximum area - 72 square feet, setback at least five (5) feet from any property line) . The site must also conform to the Highway 10 DOD with respect to site lighting. Any site lighting must be directed to the parking areas and away from adjacent property. The proposed site plan conforms to the Highway 10 DOD standards relating to building setback and buffer/landscape areas. Public Works and staff have indicated concern with the proposed drive location on Southridge Drive. It is felt that the drive location with respect to the branch bank location will cause vehicular circulation and stacking problems. Public Works notes that there is not adequate area to provide proper vehicular maneuvering and stacking in this area. Public Works has noted that the proposed drive from Southridge Dr. could be supported as a right- in/right-out drive if the branch bank facility is moved to provide for the increased vehicular circulation and stacking area as needed. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is proposing 0-3 permitted and accessory uses for the property. The Ordinance allows accessory uses in the 0-3 district to occupy up to ten (10) percent of the total floor area on a site. The list of accessory uses includes such commercial uses on a restaurant, barber/beauty shop, clothing store, drugstore, and other similar uses. Staff feels that 0-1 (Quiet Office district) permitted uses would be more appropriate for the site, given the site's close proximity to the Walton Heights single family neighborhood. The issues relating to the proposed use mix and the driveway/branch bank location along Southridge Dr. need to be discussed and resolved by the full Commission. With these issues being resolved, staff is comfortable with the proposed development of this property. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the POD zoning subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. L� FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) 2. Staff suggests 0-1 permitted uses for the property. 3. The issue relating to driveway/branch bank location along Southridge Drive needs to be resolved. 4. Any site lighting shall be directed to the parking areas and away from adjacent property. 5. Any ground -mounted signage must conform to the Highway 10 DOD as noted in paragraph G. of this report. 6. The dumpster area must be screened on three (3) sides with an 8 foot wood fence or wall. 7. The west one-half of the property must remain undisturbed as noted on the site plan. 8. Based on the fact that this is a wooded site, there is to be no grading or site work until a building permit is obtained. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (DECEMBER 9, 1999) Joe White, Dickson Flake and Kevin Hutchinson were present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the POD site plan. Staff noted that some additional information was needed pertaining to the site plan. There was a detailed discussion relating to the proposed access drive from Southridge Drive. Vehicular circulation and stacking for the proposed branch bank were discussed in relation to the drive location. The grade elevation changes were also discussed. Staff noted that cross sections and retaining wall details were needed. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 6, 2000) Dickson Flake, Russ McDonough and Joe White were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the POD rezoning request, with a recommendation of approval with conditions. Staff noted that several phone calls and letters had been received from persons expressing concern with the proposed development. Staff noted that the applicant had agreed to 0-1 permitted uses for the site. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, noted that the Little Rock Fire Chief had reviewed the site plan and had no problem with the proposed Southridge Drive driveway location. 6 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Dickson Flake described the proposed POD site plan. He noted that the driveway from Southridge Drive was an important part of the proposed development. He described the projected traffic that would be generated by the proposed use and noted that the information had been provided to Public Works. Mr. Flake explained the proposed retaining wall construction along the north side of the building, noting that the maximum cut would be approximately 30 feet at the northwest corner of the building and 15 to 20 feet elsewhere. He also noted that the proposed building height would be approximately 25 feet. Russ McDonough also spoke in favor of the application. He noted that this proposed site plan conformed to most of the requirements of the new landscape and tree preservation ordinance which is being proposed by the Land Alteration Task Force. Mr. McDonough provided a north/south section to the Commission, noting that the houses to the north will not be able to see the proposed office building. Mr. Flake explained that there were undisturbed buffers provided for on the site plan. Bill Mauldin, president of the Walton Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood Association, addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. He stated that the neighborhood association was not notified of the public hearing. He noted that he had received approximately 50 phone calls from concerned neighbors. He noted that he was opposed to the curb cut along Southridge Drive. He expressed public safety issues with regards to the curb cut and its location to the fire department driveway. He stated that the proposed development was not consistent with the Walton Heights neighborhood, and expressed concerns with traffic in the area and environmental issues. Mr. Mauldin also stated that the new regulations that result from the Land Alteration Task Force should be applied to this property, and that there should be a comprehensive plan for the Highway 10 area. He closed by stating that the proposed use of the property is not in the best interest of the neighborhood. Gary Liles also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted that he did not oppose an office development on the site. He stated that he had concern with the proposed curb cut on Southridge Drive and explained. Jeannette Straub also addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. She stated that she had received approximately 25 phone calls from concerned neighbors. She also stated that she was opposed to the curb cut on Southridge Drive, with the 7 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) close proximity to the fire department. She also expressed concerns with traffic and site grading. Deanna Bushman, President of the Piedmont Neighborhood Association, also addressed the Commission in opposition. She expressed concerns with the impact of the proposed development on the three lakes in the Piedmont Neighborhood. She explained the stormwater discharge in the general area of the Piedmont neighborhood. Jerome Grismer also spoke in opposition. He stated that he was opposed to the curb cut along Southridge Drive, being too close to the fire department. Mr. Flake recognized that Highway 10 is a scenic corridor and noted that the proposed development conforms to the intent of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standards. He noted that the Southridge Drive curb cut was essential to the development. He also noted that the proposed building covered only 7 percent of the site, which was a very low density. He stated that a property owner is entitled to the reasonable development of land, and that the proposed development is reasonable. Commissioner Lowry asked about the safety issue regarding the location of the Southridge Drive curb cut and the fire department. Dennis Free, of the Little Rock Fire Department, explained the fire department's policy regarding department vehicle safety at intersections. He noted that the proposed curb cut will not adversely impact the fire department access to Southridge Drive. Commissioner Lowry asked if Public Works was satisfied with the curb cut from a safety standpoint. Bob Turner, of Public Works, noted that the department is satisfied with the drive location. He discussed the issue with respect to the proposed uses and traffic generation. Commissioner Muse asked about the past discussion regarding the alignment of Southridge Drive and Pleasant Ridge Road. Mr. Lawson explained that as a result of previous meetings, there would be an alignment of an internal street within the Schickel development to the south with Southridge Drive. Commissioner Muse noted agreement with the low intensity of the proposed development. He expressed concerns with the curb cut 8 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) on Southridge Drive and stormwater detention. He asked if the site could be redesigned to place the branch bank on the west side of the building. Mr. Flake stated that alternate site designs were explored, but determined not to be workable. Joe White explained that the stormwater detention would be underground and would comply with city and state regulations during and after construction. Mr. White explained the stormwater detention requirements to the neighbors present. Mr. Turner also explained the stormwater detention requirements, including the siltation basin requirement. He stated that he is comfortable with the erosion control measures proposed with this development, and that Public Works would monitor the site. Commissioner Rahman asked about driveway spacing. Mr. Turner noted that the curb cut on Southridge Drive is approximately 300 feet back from the intersection, which conforms to ordinance standards. There was a discussion of the traffic in this general area. Commissioner Rahman expressed concern with the curb cut on Southridge Drive. He asked if the west portion of the property would be developed. Mr. Flake responded that the western portion of the property would remain undeveloped. Commissioner Faust asked about the curb cut on Southridge Drive with respect to the Public Works requirements. Mr. Turner concluded that, based on the projected traffic numbers, the curb cut could be supported. Commissioner Faust asked about the required siltation pond. Mr. Turner responded that the siltation pond is an extraordinary requirement, which is not used very often. Commissioner Downing asked about the standard for calculating traffic numbers for a bank facility. Mr. Turner explained the standards. 0 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Commissioner Faust asked about the driveway and parking designs. Mr. Flake briefly described the design issues. Commissioner Hawn asked if an acceleration lane was needed for the westernmost drive, along Cantrell Road. Mr. Turner explained that most of the traffic would be coming from the east. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rahman asked about a traffic signal at Pleasant Ridge Road. Mr. Turner explained that a signal was currently warranted at that intersection. The issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Nunnley asked Mr. Mauldin and Ms. Bushman what concerns they had after hearing the presentations. Mr. Mauldin expressed concerns with the traffic on Southridge. Ms. Bushman noted that there was concern with water run-off during construction. Mr. Lawson noted that part of staff's recommendation was that no grading or site work be done until a building permit is issued. Mr. McDonough stated that the developer will not excavate the site until a building permit is obtained. Commissioner Hawn noted that if the site is cleared and remains undeveloped for 90 days it should be sodded. Commissioner Berry noted that the Walton Heights Neighborhood rejected a second access point into the neighborhood. He asked if the neighborhood would be satisfied with the development, if the curb cut on Southridge Drive was eliminated. Mr. Mauldin stated that the neighborhood would not be satisfied. There was additional discussion regarding a possible acceleration lane for the Cantrell Road entrance and the future traffic signal at the Pleasant Ridge Road intersection. Mr. Flake noted that this developer would participate in the traffic signal construction. This issue was briefly discussed. 10 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Ms. Straub asked about the alignment of Pleasant Ridge Road and Southridge Dr. Mr. Lawson stated that the alignment had nothing to do with this application. Chair Adcock asked when the project construction would begin and when the traffic signal would be installed. Mr. Flake stated that construction would begin in June or July of this year. He stated that he could not give specific timing of the traffic signal installation. There was a motion to approve the POD rezoning as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 2 nays and 1 absent. 11 January 6, 2000 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-6787 NAME: Southridge Office Park - Long -Form POD LOCATION: Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Southridge Drive F91AM-30 I[Q !J 3411* ENGINEER: Barnes Quinn Flake and Anderson White-Daters and Associates 400 W. Capitol Avenue 401 S. Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 7.15 acres ZONING: R-2 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED USE: VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: FT. NEW STREET: 0 Single Family residential Office None requested The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-2 to POD to allow for the development of an office building. The project consists of construction of a'20,200 square foot office building (20 feet in height) within the east one-half of the property. The proposed building will have a drive-thru branch bank facility within the east portion of the building. A parking area is proposed along the south side of the proposed building containing 88 parking spaces. Two (2) access points are proposed, one from Cantrell Road and one from Southridge Dr. The applicant has noted that the west one-half of the property will not be -developed and will remain undisturbed. The applicant is requesting 0-3 permitted and accessory uses for the site. The proposed hours of operation will be as follows: January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 Bank - 8:30 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Saturday Remaining Offices - 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Saturday B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and wooded. The property slopes upward from Cantrell Road to the north. The Walton Heights Neighborhood is located immediately north of the site. There is a Little Rock Fire Station to the east across Southridge Dr., with 0-2 zoned property and a church further east. Undeveloped R-2 zoned property is located immediately west of this site, on the north side of Cantrell Road. There is a mixture of commercial uses and zoning to the south across Cantrell Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one (1) phone call from a person expressing concerns about this proposed development. The Walton Heights/Candlewood and Piedmont Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial, dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. 3. 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. 4. Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 2 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 7. Bank drive does not have sufficient vehicle storage. Redesign and resubmit. 8. Recommend acceleration lane from Southridge Drive to Cantrell Road. 9. Provide cross-sections and elevation for proposed development. 10. Construct siltation pond during construction for run- off. 11. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 12. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 13. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 14. Existing topographic information at maximum five foot contour interval 100 base flood elevation is required. 15. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186(e) is required. 16. A Grading Permit per Secs. 29-186(c) and (d) is required. 17. Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start work. 18. Cantrell Road has average daily traffic count of 25,000. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: If a 30 foot overhead power line is required, a 30 foot easement will be required. Arkla: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: On site fire protection may be required. A development fee based on the size of the connection may apply. Fire Department: No Comment. County Planning: No Comment. CATA: Site is not currently served by CATA. A sidewalk should be provided from the Cantrell entrance to the proposed building. 3 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: FILE NO.: Z-6787 This request is in the River Mountain Planning District. The current Land Use Plan shows Transition. Development of a POD is consistent with this land use category. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, which calls for preservation of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Landscape Issues: The plan submitted does not appear to provide for the three foot deep building landscaping required between the public parking areas and building. Some flexibility with this requirement is allowed. Because of the grade elevation changes, cross sections of the proposed project will be required along with proposed treatment of the changes in grade. This development is required to be screened to a height of 6 feet from the adjacent residential properties to the north, east and west. This screen may be an opaque wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings with growth to 6 feet within three years. Credit toward satisfying this requirement can be given for existing vegetation which provides the year-round required screening. This is a wooded site and the recommends preserving as many Extra credit toward fulfilling requirements can be given when caliper or larger. G. ANALYSIS: City Beautiful Commission existing trees as feasible. Landscape Ordinance preserving trees of 6 inch The applicant submitted a revised site plan and a property north/south section to staff on December 6, 1999. The revised plan addresses some of the concerns as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee. The revised plan notes the dumpster location, building height and reduces 4 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 the number of parking spaces from 105 to 88 spaces. The ordinance would typically require 49 parking spaces for an office development of this size. Staff supports the parking plan as proposed. The north/south section provided by the applicant notes that the vertical cut will be approximately 26 feet at the rear of the building. Two (2) retaining walls are proposed in this area. The applicant has noted that the maximum vertical cut will be approximately 30 feet at the northwest corner of the building. Any vertical cut over 30 feet requires Planning commission approval. Public Works has indicated support for the vertical cut and retaining wall construction as proposed. The revised site plan does not show a sign location. Any ground -mounted sign must conform to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District Standards (monument -type, maximum height - six (6) feet, maximum area - 72 square feet, setback at least five (5) feet from any property line). The site must also conform to the Highway 10 DOD with respect to site lighting. Any site lighting must be directed to the parking areas and away from adjacent property. The proposed site plan conforms to the Highway 10 DOD standards relating to building setback and buffer/landscape areas. Public Works and staff have indicated concern with the proposed drive location on Southridge Drive. It is felt that the drive location with respect to the branch bank location will cause vehicular circulation and stacking problems. Public Works notes that there is not adequate area to provide proper vehicular maneuvering and stacking in this area. Public Works has noted that the proposed drive from Southridge Dr. could be supported as a right- in/right-out drive if the branch bank facility is moved to provide for the increased vehicular circulation and stacking area as needed. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is proposi O-3 permitted and accessory uses for the property. The Ordinance allows accessory uses in the 0-3 district to occupy up to ten (10) percent of the total floor area on a site. The list of accessory uses includes such commercial uses on a restaurant, barber/beauty shop, clothing store, 0 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 drugstore, and other similar uses. Staff feels that 0-1 (Quiet Office district) permitted uses would be more appropriate for the site, given the site's close proximity to the Walton Heights single family neighborhood. The issues relating to the proposed use mix and the driveway/branch bank location along Southridge Dr. need to be discussed and resolved by the full Commission. With these issues being resolved, staff is comfortable with the proposed development of this property. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the POD zoning subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs Caf Ls Fof this re ort.2.gges s - permitted uses mor the property. 3. e a zng o r3.veway/branch bank location along Southridge Drive needs to be resolved. 4. Any site lighting shall be directed to the parking areas and away from adjacent property. 5. Any ground -mounted signage must conform to the Highway 10 DOD as noted in paragraph G. of this report. 6. The dumpster area must be screened on three (3) sides with an 8 foot wood fence or wall. 7.The est one-half of the propert must remain undisturbed as n on a sz e p an. 8. Based on the fact that this is a wooded site, there is to be no grading or site work until a building permit is obtained. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 9, 1999) Joe White, Dickson Flake and Kevin Hutchinson were present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the POD site plan. Staff noted that some additional information was needed pertaining to the site plan. There was a detailed discussion relating to the proposed access drive from Southridge Drive. Vehicular circulation and stacking for the proposed branch bank were discussed in relation to the drive location. The grade elevation changes were also discussed. Staff noted that cross sections and retaining wall details were needed. 6 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 6, 2000) Dickson Flake, Russ McDonough and Joe White were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the POD rezoning request, with a recommendation of approval with conditions. Staff noted that several phone calls and letters had been received from persons expressing concern with the proposed development. Staff noted that the applicant had agreed to 0-1 permitted uses for the site. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, noted that the Little Rock Fire Chief had reviewed the site plan and had no problem with the proposed Southridge Drive driveway location. Dickson Flake described the proposed POD site plan. He noted that the driveway from Southridge Drive was an important part of the proposed development. He described the projected traffic that would be generated by the proposed use and noted that the information had been provided to Public Works. Mr. Flake explained the proposed retaining wall construction along the north side of the building, noting that the maximum cut would be approximately 30 feet at the northwest corner of the building and 15 to 20 feet elsewhere. He also noted that the proposed building height would be approximately 25 feet. Russ McDonough also spoke in favor of the application. He noted that this proposed site plan conformed to most of the requirements of the new landscape and tree preservation ordinance which is being proposed by the Land Alteration Task Force. Mr. McDonough provided a north/south section to the Commission, noting that the houses to the north will not be able to see the proposed office building. Mr. Flake explained that there were undisturbed buffers provided for on the site plan. Bill Mauldin, president of the Walton Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood Association, addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. He stated that the neighborhood association was not notified of the public hearing. He noted that he had received approximately 50 phone calls from concerned neighbors. 7 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 {Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6787 He noted that he was opposed to the curb cut along Southridge Drive. He expressed public safety issues with regards to the curb cut and its location to the fire department driveway. He stated that the proposed development was not consistent with the Walton Heights neighborhood, and expressed concerns with traffic in the area and environmental issues. Mr. Mauldin also stated that the new regulations that result from the Land Alteration Task Force should be applied to this property, and that there should be a comprehensive plan for the Highway 10 area. He closed by stating that the proposed use'of the property is not in the best interest of the neighborhood. Gary Liles also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted that he did not oppose an office development on the site. He stated that he had concern with the proposed curb cut on Southridge Drive and explained. Jeannette Straub also addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. She stated that she had received approximately 25 phone calls from concerned neighbors. She also stated that she was opposed to the curb cut on Southridge Drive, with the close proximity to the fire department. She also expressed concerns with traffic and site grading. Deanna Bushman, President of the Piedmont Neighborhood Association, also addressed the Commission in opposition. She expressed concerns with the impact of the proposed development on the three lakes in the Piedmont Neighborhood. She explained the stormwater discharge in the general area of the Piedmont neighborhood. Jerome Grismer also spoke in opposition. He stated that he was opposed to the curb cut along Southridge Drive, being too close to the fire department. Mr. Flake recognized that Highway 10 is a scenic corridor and noted that the proposed development conforms to the intent of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standards. He noted that the Southridge Drive curb cut was essential to the development. He also noted that the proposed building covered only 7 percent of the site, which was a very low density. He stated that a property owner is entitled to the reasonable development of land, and that the proposed development is reasonable. 8 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 Commissioner Lowry asked about the safety issue regarding the location of the Southridge Drive curb cut and the fire department. Dennis Free, of the Little Rock Fire Department, explained the fire department's policy regarding department vehicle safety at intersections. He noted that the proposed curb cut will not adversely impact the fire department access to Southridge Drive. Commissioner Lowry asked if Public Works was satisfied with the curb cut from a safety standpoint. Bob Turner, of Public Works, noted that the department is satisfied with the drive location. He discussed the issue with respect to the proposed uses and traffic generation. Commissioner Muse asked about the past discussion regarding the alignment of Southridge Drive and Pleasant Ridge Road. Mr. Lawson explained that as a result of previous meetings, there would be an alignment of an internal street within the Schickel development to the south with Southridge Drive. Commissioner Muse noted agreement with the low intensity of the proposed development. He expressed concerns with the curb cut on Southridge Drive and stormwater detention. He asked if the site could be redesigned to place the branch bank on the west side of the building. Mr. Flake stated that alternate site designs were explored, but determined not to be workable. Joe White explained that the stormwater detention would be underground and would comply with city and state regulations during and after construction. Mr. White explained the stormwater detention requirements to the neighbors present. Mr. Turner also explained the stormwater detention requirements, including the siltation basin requirement. He stated that he is comfortable with the erosion control measures proposed with this development, and that Public Works would monitor the site. Commissioner Rahman asked about driveway spacing. January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 Mr. Turner noted that the curb cut on Southridge Drive is approximately 300 feet back from the intersection, which conforms to ordinance standards. There was a discussion of the traffic in this general area. Commissioner Rahman expressed concern with the curb cut on Southridge Drive. He asked if the west portion of the property would be developed. Mr. Flake responded that the western portion of the property would remain undeveloped. Commissioner Faust asked about the curb cut on Southridge Drive with respect to the Public Works requirements. Mr. Turner concluded that, based on the projected traffic numbers, the curb cut could be supported. Commissioner Faust asked about the required siltation pond. Mr. Turner responded that the siltation pond is an extraordinary requirement, which is not used very often. Commissioner Downing asked about the standard for calculating traffic numbers for a bank facility. Mr. Turner explained the standards. Commissioner Faust asked about the driveway and parking designs. Mr. Flake briefly described the design issues. Commissioner Hawn asked if an acceleration lane was needed for the westernmost drive, along Cantrell Road. Mr. Turner explained that most of the traffic would be coming from the east. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rahman asked about a traffic signal at Pleasant Ridge Road. Mr. Turner explained that a signal was currently warranted at that intersection. The issue was briefly discussed. 10 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6787 Commissioner Nunnley asked Mr. Mauldin and Ms. Bushman what concerns they had after hearing the presentations. Mr. Mauldin expressed concerns with the traffic on Southridge. Ms. Bushman noted that there was concern with water run-off during construction. Mr. Lawson noted that part of staff's recommendation was that no grading or site work be done until a building permit is issued. Mr. McDonough stated that the developer will not excavate the site until a building permit is obtained. Commissioner Hawn noted that if the site is cleared and remains undeveloped for 90 days it should be sodded. Commissioner Berry noted that the Walton Heights Neighborhood rejected a second access point into the neighborhood. He asked if the neighborhood would be satisfied with the development, if the curb cut on Southridge Drive was eliminated. Mr. Mauldin stated that the neighborhood would not be satisfied. There was additional discussion regarding a possible acceleration lane for the Cantrell Road entrance and the future traffic signal at the Pleasant Ridge Road intersection. Mr. Flake noted that this developer would participate in the traffic signal construction. This issue was briefly discussed. Ms. Straub asked about the alignment of Pleasant Ridge Road and Southridge Dr. Mr. Lawson stated that the alignment had nothing to do with this application. Chair Adcock asked when the project construction would begin and when the traffic signal would be installed. Mr. Flake stated that construction would begin in June or July of this year. He stated that he could not give specific timing of the traffic signal installation. 11 January 6, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6787 There was a motion to approve the POD rezoning as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 2 nays and 1 absent. 12 FILE NO.: Z-6787 NAME: Southridge Office Park - Long -Form POD LOCATION: Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Southridge Drive DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Barnes Quinn Flake and Anderson White-Daters and Associates 400 W. Capitol Avenue 401 S. Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 7.15 acres ZONING: R-2 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ALLOWED USES: Single Family residential PROPOSED USE: Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-2 to POD to allow for the development of an office building. The project consists of construction of a 20,200 square foot office building (20 feet in height) within the east one-half of the property. The proposed building will have a drive-thru branch bank facility within the east portion of the building. A parking area is proposed along the south side of the proposed building containing 88 parking spaces. Two (2) access points are proposed, one from Cantrell Road and one from Southridge Dr. The applicant has noted that the west one-half of the property will not be developed and will remain undisturbed. The applicant is requesting 0-3 permitted and accessory uses for the site. The proposed hours of operation will be as follows: FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont. Bank - 8:30 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Friday 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Saturday Remaining Offices - 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday - Saturday B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and wooded. The property slopes upward from Cantrell Road to the north. The Walton Heights Neighborhood is located immediately north of the site. There is a Little Rock Fire Station to the east across Southridge Dr., with 0-2 zoned property and a church further east. Undeveloped R-2 zoned property is located immediately west of this site, on the north side of Cantrell Road. There is a mixture of commercial uses and zoning to the south across Cantrell -Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one (1) phone call from a person expressing concerns about this proposed development. The Walton Heights/Candlewood and Piedmont Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial, dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2- Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. 3. 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. 4. Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Plans of all work in right=cf-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 7. Bank drive does not have sufficient vehicle storage. Redesign and resubmit. 8. Recommend acceleration lane from Southridge Drive to Cantrell Road. 2 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) 9. Provide cross-sections and elevation for proposed development. - 10. Construct siltation pond during construction for run- off. 11. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 12. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 13. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 14. Existing topographic information at maximum five foot contour interval 100 base flood elevation is required. 15. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.,29-186(e) is required. 16. A Grading Permit per Secs. 29-186(c) and (d) is required. 17. Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start work. 18. Cantrell Road has average daily traffic count of 25,000. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: If a 30 foot overhead power line is required, a 30 foot easement will be required. Arkla: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: On site fire protection may be required. A development fee based on the size of the connection may apply. Fire Department: No Comment. County Planning: No Comment. CATA: Site is not currently served by CATA. A sidewalk should be provided from the Cantrell entrance to the proposed building. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is in the River Mountain Planning District. The current Land Use Plan shows Transition. Development of a POD is consistent with this land use category. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, which calls for preservation of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. 3 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Landscape Issues: The plan submitted does not appear to provide for the three foot deep building landscaping required between the public parking areas and building. Some flexibility with this requirement is allowed. Because of the grade elevation changes, cross sections of the proposed project will be required along with proposed treatment of the changes in grade. This development is required to be screened to a height of 6 feet from the adjacent residential properties to the north, east and west. This screen may be an opaque wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings with growth to 6 feet within three years. Credit toward satisfying this requirement can be given for existing vegetation which provides the year-round required screening. This is a wooded site and the City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of 6 Inch caliper or larger. �^ G. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan and a property north/south section to staff on December 6, 1999. The revised plan addresses some of the concerns as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee: The revised plan notes the dumpster location, building height and reduces the number of parking spaces from 105 to 88 spaces. The ordinance would typically require 49 parking spaces for an office development of this size. Staff supports the parking plan as proposed. The north/south section provided by the applicant notes that the vertical cut will be approximately 26 feet at the rear of the building. Two (2) retaining walls are proposed in this area. The applicant has noted that the maximum vertical cut will be approximately 30 feet at the northwest corner of the building. Any vertical cut over 30 feet requires Planning commission approval. Public Works has indicated support for the vertical cut and retaining wall construction as proposed. 4 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) The revised site plan does not show a sign location. Any ground -mounted sign must conform to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District Standards (monument -type, maximum height - six (6) feet, maximum area - 72 square feet, setback at least five (5) feet from any property line) . The site must also conform to the Highway 10 DOD with respect to site lighting. Any site lighting must be directed to the parking areas and away from adjacent property. The proposed site plan conforms to the Highway 10 DOD standards relating to building setback and buffer/landscape areas. Public Works and staff have indicated concern with the proposed drive location on Southridge Drive. It is felt that the drive location with respect to the branch bank location will cause vehicular circulation and stacking problems. Public Works notes that there is not adequate area to provide proper vehicular maneuvering and stacking in this area. Public Works has noted that the proposed drive from Southridge Dr. could be supported as a right- in/right-out drive if the branch bank facility is moved to provide for the increased vehicular circulation and stacking area as needed. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is proposing 0-3 permitted and accessory uses for the property. The Ordinance allows accessory uses in the 0-3 district to occupy up to ten (10) percent of the total floor area on a site. The list of accessory uses includes such commercial uses on a restaurant, barber/beauty shop, clothing store, drugstore, and other similar uses. Staff feels that 0-1 (Quiet Office district) permitted uses would be more appropriate for the site, given the site's close proximity to the Walton Heights single family neighborhood. The issues relating to the proposed use mix and the driveway/branch bank location along-Southridge Dr. need to be discussed and resolved by the full Commission. With these issues being resolved, staff is comfortable with the proposed development of this property. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the POD zoning subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) 2. Staff suggests 0-1 permitted uses for the property. 3. The issue relating to driveway/branch bank location along Southridge Drive needs to be resolved. 4. Any site lighting shall be directed to the parking areas and away from adjacent property. 5. Any ground -mounted signage must conform to the Highway 10 DOD as noted in paragraph G. of this report. 6. The dumpster area must be screened on three (3) sides with an 8 foot wood fence or wall. 7. The west one-half of, the property must remain undisturbed as noted on the site plan. 8. Based on the fact that this is a wooded site, there is to be no grading or site work until a building permit is obtained. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (DECEMBER 9, 1999) Joe White, Dickson Flake and Kevin Hutchinson were present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the POD site plan. Staff noted that some additional information was needed pertaining to the site plan. There was a detailed discussion relating to the proposed access drive from Southridge Drive. Vehicular circulation and stacking for the proposed branch bank were discussed in relation to the drive location. The grade elevation changes were also discussed. Staff noted that cross sections and retaining wall details were needed. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 6, 2000) Dickson Flake, Russ McDonough and Joe White were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the POD rezoning request, with a recommendation of approval with conditions. Staff noted that several phone calls and letters had been received from persons expressing concern with the proposed development. Staff noted that the applicant had agreed to 0-1 permitted uses for the site. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, noted that the Little Rock Fire Chief had reviewed the site plan and had no problem with the proposed Southridge Drive driveway location. 2 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont. Dickson Flake described the proposed POD site plan. He noted that the driveway from Southridge Drive was an important part of the proposed development. He described the projected traffic that would be generated by the proposed use and noted that the information had been provided to Public Works. Mr. Flake explained the proposed retaining wall construction along the north side of the building, noting that the maximum cut would be approximately 30 feet at the northwest corner of the building and 15 to 20 feet elsewhere. He also noted that the proposed building height would be approximately 25 feet. Russ McDonough also spoke in favor of the application. He noted that this proposed site plan conformed to most of the requirements of the new landscape and tree preservation ordinance which is being proposed by the Land Alteration Task Force. Mr. McDonough provided a north/south section to the Commission, noting that the houses to the north will not be able to see the proposed office building. Mr. Flake explained that there were undisturbed buffers provided for on the site plan. Bill Mauldin, president of the Walton Heights/Candlewood Neighborhood Association, addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. He stated that the neighborhood association was not notified of the public hearing. He noted that he had received approximately 50 phone calls from concerned neighbors. He noted that he was opposed to the curb cut along Southridge Drive. He expressed public safety issues with regards to the curb cut and its location to the fire department driveway. He stated that the proposed development was not consistent with the Walton Heights neighborhood, and expressed concerns with traffic in the area and environmental issues. Mr. Mauldin also stated that the new regulations that result from the Land Alteration Task Force should be applied to this property, and that there should be a comprehensive plan for the Highway 10 area. He closed by stating that the proposed use of the property is not in the best interest of the neighborhood. Gary Liles also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted that he did not oppose an office development on the site. He stated that he had concern with the proposed curb cut on Southridge Drive and explained. Jeannette Straub also addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. She stated that she had received approximately 25 phone calls from concerned neighbors. She also stated that she was opposed to the curb cut on Southridge Drive, with the 7 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) close proximity to the fire department. She also expressed concerns with traffic and site grading. Deanna Bushman, President of the Piedmont Neighborhood Association, also addressed the Commission in opposition. She expressed concerns with the impact of the proposed development on the three lakes in the Piedmont Neighborhood. She explained the stormwater discharge in the general area of the Piedmont neighborhood. Jerome Grismer also spoke in opposition. He stated that he was opposed to the curb cut along Southridge Drive, being too close to the fire department. Mr. Flake recognized that Highway 10 is a scenic corridor and noted that the proposed development conforms to the intent of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standards. He noted that the Southridge Drive curb cut was essential to the development. He also noted that the proposed building covered only 7 percent of the site, which was a very low density. He stated that a property owner is entitled to the reasonable development of land, and that the proposed development is reasonable. Commissioner Lowry asked about the safety issue regarding the location of the Southridge Drive curb cut and the fire department. Dennis Free, of the Little Rock Fire Department, explained the fire department's policy regarding department vehicle safety at intersections. He noted that the proposed curb cut will not adversely impact the fire department access to Southridge Drive. Commissioner Lowry asked if Public Works was satisfied with the curb cut from a safety standpoint. Bob Turner, of Public Works, noted that the department is satisfied with the drive location. He discussed the issue with respect to the proposed uses and traffic generation. Commissioner Muse asked about the past discussion regarding the alignment of Southridge Drive and Pleasant Ridge Road. Mr. Lawson explained that as a result of previous meetings, there would be an alignment of an internal street within the Schickel development to the south with Southridge Drive. Commissioner Muse noted agreement with the low intensity of the proposed development. He expressed concerns with the curb cut 8 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) on Southridge Drive and stormwater detention. He asked if the site could be redesigned to place the branch bank on the west side of the building. Mr. Flake stated that alternate site designs were explored, but determined not to be workable. Joe White explained that the stormwater detention would be underground and would comply with city and state regulations during and after construction. Mr. White explained the stormwater detention requirements to the neighbors present. Mr. Turner also explained the stormwater detention requirements, including the siltation basin requirement. He stated that he is comfortable with the erosion control measures proposed with this development, and that Public Works would.monitor the site. Commissioner Rahman asked about driveway spacing. Mr. Turner noted that the curb cut on Southridge Drive is approximately 300 feet back from the intersection, which conforms to ordinance standards. There was a discussion of the traffic in this general area. Commissioner Rahman expressed concern with the curb cut on Southridge Drive. He asked if the west portion of the property would be developed. Mr. Flake responded that the western portion of the property would remain undeveloped. Commissioner Faust asked about the curb cut on Southridge Drive with respect to the Public Works requirements. Mr. Turner concluded that, based on the projected traffic numbers, the curb cut could be supported. Commissioner Faust asked about the required siltation pond. Mr. Turner responded that the siltation pond is an extraordinary requirement, which is not used very often. Commissioner Downing asked about the standard for calculating traffic numbers for a bank facility. Mr. Turner explained the standards. FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Commissioner Faust asked about the driveway and parking designs. Mr. Flake briefly described the design issues. Commissioner Hawn asked if an acceleration lane was needed for the westernmost drive, along Cantrell Road. Mr. Turner explained that most of the traffic would be coming from the east. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rahman asked about a traffic signal at Pleasant Ridge Road. Mr. Turner explained that a signal was currently warranted at that intersection. The issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Nunnley asked Mr. Mauldin and Ms. Bushman what concerns they had after hearing the presentations. Mr. Mauldin expressed concerns with the traffic on Southridge. Ms. Bushman noted that there was concern with water run-off during construction. Mr. Lawson noted that part of staff's recommendation was that no grading or site work be done until a building permit is issued. Mr. McDonough stated that the developer will not excavate the site until a building permit is obtained. Commissioner Hawn noted that if the site is cleared and remains undeveloped for 90 days it should be sodded. Commissioner Berry noted that the Walton Heights Neighborhood rejected a second access point into the neighborhood. He asked if the neighborhood would be satisfied with the development, if the curb cut on Southridge Drive was eliminated. Mr. Mauldin stated that the neighborhood would not be satisfied. There was additional discussion regarding a possible acceleration lane for the Cantrell Road entrance and the future traffic signal at the Pleasant Ridge Road intersection. Mr. Flake noted that this developer would participate in the traffic signal construction. This issue was briefly discussed. 10 FILE NO.: Z-6787 (Cont.) Ms. Straub asked about the alignment of Pleasant Ridge Road and Southridge Dr. Mr. Lawson stated that the alignment had nothing to do with this application. Chair Adcock asked when the project construction would begin and when the traffic signal would be installed. Mr. Flake stated that construction would begin in June or July of this year. He stated that he could not give specific timing of the traffic signal installation. There was a motion to approve the POD rezoning as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 2 nays and 1 absent. 11