Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7022-C Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -7022-C NAME: Cantrell Loops (Lot 2) Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: Located on the North side of Cantrell Road at Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Rees Development Inc. 11719 Hinson Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 2.02 acres CURRENT ZONING: ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED ZONING: NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 PCD FT. NEI111 STREET: 0 LF Strip Retail with C-3, General Commercial District uses Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Strip Retail with C-3, General Commercial District uses and a reduced rear yard land use buffer VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed and approved a proposed three lot preliminary plat and recommended approval of a proposed rezoning request proposed Lot 1 at their May 31, 2001, Public Hearing. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,516 on July 3, 2001, establishing Cantrell Loops Subdivision (Lot 1) Short -form PCD. The remainder of he site was zoned C-3, General Commercial District and R-2, Single-family District. On April 6, 2004, the Little Rock Board of Directors rezoned Lot 2 from C-3, General Commercial District and R-2, Single-family District to PCD by the adoption of Ordinance FILE NO.: Z -7022-C (Cont.) I _ No. 19,073. The rezoning included the development of 4.265 acres through a Planned Commercial Development with a strip retail center containing C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable uses for the site. The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed this request and made a recommendation of approval at their March 11, 2004, public hearing. The proposal included the construction of a single building totaling 22,400 square feet. The applicant indicated a western side yard setback of 25 -feet with a 20 -foot landscaped strip and a northern setback of 30 -feet and a landscaped strip of 25 -feet. The approved site plan included a six foot wood fence in addition to plantings at one and one-half times the required landscaping typically required along the northern and western property lines. The applicant indicated the additional screening and landscaping would be provided to protect the adjoining residentially zoned properties. The applicant also indicated the rears of the building would act as screening and no doors or windows would be place on the rear of the building other than those required by fire code. The applicant indicated mechanical equipment would be placed in an area that would not be intrusive to the adjoining single-family zoned properties. On January 20, 2005, the Little Rock Planning Commission review a request to rezone Lot 3 of the Cantrell Loops Subdivision from C-3, Generai Commercial District to PCD, which would allow a the required rear yard buffer to be contained within an existing 30 -foot easement. The Little Rock Board of Directors approved the request by the adopted Ordinance No. 19,276 on February 15, 2005, which established Cantrell Loops Subdivision (Lot 3) PCD. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is now proposing the revise the previously approved Lot 2 PCD to allow the construction of a single building totaling 25,941 square feet along with 117 parking spaces. The applicant's site plan indicates a fifteen foot building setback along the western property line and landscaping to be placed in a ten foot utility easement. The site plan also includes the placement of a ten foot landscaped strip along the northern perimeter of the site contained within a 20 -foot utility easement. The site plan includes the placement of 12 parking spaces behind the proposed building along with two trash dumpsters. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation are from 7 am to 10 pm seven days per week. The site plan also includes the placement of a pole sign with a maximum of 36 -feet in height and 160 square feet in area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is mostly wooded along the northern perimeter and vacant grass covered near the Wal -Green's site. Currently, under construction on Lot 3 of the Cantrell Loops Subdivision, is a restaurant building for Catfish City and there is a Wal -Greens located on Lot 1. Across Cantrell Road is the Taylor Loop Road intersection, which is a signalized intersection aligning with a drive that accesses this site. To the east of the site is a strip center containing a mix of commercial and office uses. To the north of the site is vacant R-2, Single-family zoned property and to the Northeast of the site is K FILE NO.: Z -7022-C (Cont. a parcel currently zoned PCD (recently cleared of all vegetation), which is to be developed as an office/warehouse facility. South of the site is an antique mall and branch bank facility. West of the site is a single-family home located on a large tract. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Westbury Neighborhood Association, the Westchester Neighborhood Association, the Secluded Hills Neighborhood Association, all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified located, within 300 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: No comment on proposed reduction in the setback line or buffer zone. All previous comments on the PCD continue to apply. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENTICOUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easement, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Enter : No comment received. Center -Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connection off the private fire system. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the 3 FILE NO.: Z -7022-C (Cont. hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). 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. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) for a decreased buffer between the edge of the property and parking lot. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial running east and west through this area and is built as a five -lane road through this section. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas.. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, Il, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance_ This action would reduce the landscape buffer to 10 feet adjacent to an area shown as Single Family. This could also cause unnecessary removal of trees in order to accommodate the development of uses possible in a Commercial area. Landscape: Because of the ten -foot wide utility easement, the proposed northern landscape buffer width is 3,980 square feet less than the 25 -foot width required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. rd FILE NO.: Z -7022-C Cont. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (March 24, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff stated the regUest was a revision to a previously approved PCD to allow the buffer areas along the northern and western perimeters to be reduced. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process and requested Mr_ McGetrick provide details of the proposed screening along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff stated the previous approval included additional plantings at one and one-half times the typical ordinance requirement and an eight -foot tall fence along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff also stated the site plan did not allow for pedestrian connectivity through the site. Staff requested the applicant indicate areas dedicated for pedestrian access by the addition of pedestrian tables and or landscaped areas designed for pedestrian connectivity. Staff stated the properties located to the north and west of the site were currently zoned R-2, Single-family. Staff requested the applicant remove all the service elements from the rear of the proposed building including the indicated dumpsters and the head -in parking located to the north of the site. Landscape comments were addressed. Staff stated because of the ten -foot wide utility easement, the proposed northern landscape buffer width was 3,980 square feet less than the 25 -foot width required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff also stated a six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, was required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff stated an irrigation system to water landscaped areas would be required. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the March 24, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a six foot screening fence will be placed along the northern and western perimeters of the site. The applicant has also indicated landscaping will be added on the applicant's side of the proposed fence but not at the rate of the previous approval. The applicant has indicated pedestrian access through the site to allow connection to Cantrell Road. The applicant has not removed the proposed parking nor the proposed dumpsters located behind the proposed building. 5 FILE NO.: Z-7022 Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The site was reviewed through an overall development plan for the Cantrell Loops Long -form PCD. The site plan as proposed does not meet the minimum Highway 10 Design Overlay standards with regard to landscaping, building setbacks or buffering. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District typically requires a minimum building setback of 40 -feet along the rear property line and 30 -feet along the side property line. Although, the proposed site plan indicates a 40 -foot building setback along the rear property line, a 15 -foot building setback is proposed along the western or side property line. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District Ordinance also requires the rear and side yards to have a landscaped buffer averaging 25 -feet from the property line independent of easements. The entirety of the proposed landscaping along the rear property line is contained within a drainage and utility easement and 10 -feet of the proposed landscaping and buffering along the western property line is located within a drainage and utility easement and does not provide the 25 -foot minimum landscape strip as was previously approved for this site. Staff is not supportive of allowing the utility easement to serve as the required landscaping and buffering. The property to the west is currently zoned and used as residential. The property to the north is currently zoned and shown of the Future Land Use Plan as residential. Although, it is unlikely the property to the west will remain a residential use in the long term, staff feels the area should be protected until redevelopment occurs. A proposal was reviewed and approved by the Commission at their January 20, 2005, Public Hearing to allow Lot 3 (the lot immediately east of the site) to utilize the utility easement as their required landscape strip but the applicant proposed to maintain a consistent 30 - foot landscape strip. Staff feels the applicant should maintain the landscaping strip as was approved immediately east of the site. Staff also feels the applicant's proposal should not intrude into the rear yard area. The site located to the north is zoned as single-family and shown on the City's Future Land Use. Plan as residential. Staff feels the placement of the proposed parking and dumpsters in this area is intrusive and makes the property less desirable for single-family development. Staff feels all intrusive activities, such as parking and dumpster locations, should be internalized and allow the rear of the buildings to act as an additional screening mechanism. Staff feels the development is inappropriate for the site as proposed based on the level of activity proposed for the rear of the site and the reduction of the required buffers and landscaping. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 14, 2005) Mr. John Rees was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated the applicant was requesting the placement of signage, which exceeded the Highway 10 6 FILE NO.: Z -7022-C Cont. Design Overlay District standard. Staff also stated the proposed development did not comply with the Overlay with regard to landscaping and building setbacks. Staff stated the previously approved site plan did not meet all the requirements of the Overlay but did come closer to meeting the intent than the applicant's request. Staff stated they were not supportive of allowing activity on the rear of the site. Staff stated they felt the dumpsters should be relocated along with the indicated parking located at the rear of the building. Mr. Rees addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated his request was to redevelop the site as a commercial center. He stated he felt the dumpster location was more appropriate and shielded from Highway 10. He stated the had contacted the property owner located to the west of the site and the property owner had requested the dumpsters be placed in the rear of the building to locate them further from his home. Mr. Rees stated the indicted parking was for employee parking only, who would not generate a great deal of in and out traffic per day. Mr. Rees stated the indicated signage had been lowered from thirty-six feet in height to sixteen feet in height. He stated the sign was to be a monument style sign and located 300 -feet from the Highway 10 right-of-way. Mr. Mike Saar addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he was President of the Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association and the Association was not supportive of development, which did not maintain the integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the League of Women Voters also agreed with staff that the integrity of the Overlay should be maintained when developments occurred. She stated it felt as if the Highway 10 Design Overlay District was a moving target and she did not feel revising a PZD prior to seeing if the approved development would work was not a good practice. She stated it appeared the only benefit to the revision would be to the developer to allow him additional building square footage on the site. She stated the landscaping indicated on the site plan was contained totally within a utility easement and it was not common practice to allow utility easements to count as required landscaping. Ms. Bell stated the perception was that a developer could get a PZD approved for one thing and then come back and revise the PZD to get another. She stated the approved development would not always work but it was important to give a development time to see if the development would work before making changes. Ms. Celia Martin did not wish to speak but noted she was opposed to the proposed request. Mr. Rees stated his desire was to gain staff approval. He stated he had met with Bob Brown to resolve issues related to the indicated landscaping. He stated the revised plan did allow for the required landscaping treatment along the rear of the site. He stated the property to the west would not likely remain residential in the long term and his proposed plan allowed protection for the current resident. 7 FILE NO.: Z -7022-C (Cont. Mr. Bob Brown of the Planning staff addressed the Commission on the merits of the proposed landscaping. He stated the indicated site plan did meet with the required landscaping along the northern property line but not along the southern property line. He stated the western buffer did not appear to comply with the Overlay requirement. Mr. Brown stated the Highway 10 Design Overlay District did allow for easements to satisfy landscaping requirements. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. It was noted the area to the north would not likely develop as a residential use due to the large amount of fill required too remove the site from the floodplain. It was also noted the developed areas on the site were allowed parking facing into the residential properties. Mr. Rees stated he was willing to amend his application to reduce the overall sign area to six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area as was typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 5 noes and 0 absent. April 14, 2005 NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z -7022-C NAME: Cantrell Loops (Lot 2) Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: Located on the North side of Cantrell Road at Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Rees Development Inc. 11719 Hinson Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 2.02 acres CURRENT ZONING: ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED ZONING: NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 im-911 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF Strip Retail with C-3, General Commercial District uses Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Strip Retail with C-3, General Commercial District uses and a reduced rear yard land use buffer VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed and approved a proposed three lot preliminary plat and recommended approval of a proposed rezoning request proposed Lot 1 at their May 31, 2001, Public Hearing. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,516 on July 3, 2001, establishing Cantrell Loops Subdivision (Lot 1) Short -form PCD. The remainder of he site was zoned C-3, General Commercial District and R-2, Single-family District. On April 6, 2004, the Little Rock Board of Directors rezoned Lot 2 from C-3, General Commercial District and R-2, Single-family District to PCD by the adoption of Ordinance April 14, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z -7022-C No. 19,073. The rezoning included the development of 4.265 acres through a Planned Commercial Development with a strip retail center containing C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable uses for the site. The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed this request and made a recommendation of approval at their March 11, 2004, public hearing. The proposal included the construction of a single building totaling 22,400 square feet. The applicant indicated a western side yard setback of 25 -feet with a 20 -foot landscaped strip and a northern setback of 30 -feet and a landscaped strip of 25 -feet. The approved site plan included a six foot wood fence in addition to plantings at one and one-half times the required landscaping typically required along the northern and western property lines. The applicant indicated the additional screening and landscaping would be provided to protect the adjoining residentially zoned properties. The applicant also indicated the rears of the building would act as screening and no doors or windows would. be place on the rear of the building other than those required by fire code. The applicant indicated mechanical equipment would be placed in an area that would not be intrusive to the adjoining single-family zoned properties. On January 20, 2005, the Little Rock Planning Commission review a request to rezone Lot 3 of the Cantrell Loops Subdivision from C-3, General Commercial District to PCD, which would allow a the required rear yard buffer to be contained within an existing 30 -foot easement. The Little Rock Board of Directors approved the request by the adopted Ordinance No. 19,276 on February 15, 2005, which established Cantrell Loops Subdivision (Lot 3) PCD. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is now proposing the revise the previously approved Lot 2 PCD to allow the construction of a single building totaling 25,941 square feet along with 117 parking spaces. The applicant's site plan indicates a fifteen foot building setback along the western property line and landscaping to be placed in a ten foot utility easement. The site plan also includes the placement of a ten foot landscaped strip along the northern perimeter of the site contained within a 20 -foot utility easement. The site plan includes the placement of 12 parking spaces behind the proposed building along with two trash dumpsters. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation are from 7 am to 10 pm seven days per week. The site plan also includes the placement of a pole sign with a maximum of 36 -feet in height and 160 square feet in area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is mostly wooded along the northern perimeter and vacant grass covered near the Wal -Green's site. Currently, under construction on Lot 3 of the Cantrell Loops Subdivision, is a restaurant building for Catfish City and there is a Wal -Greens located on Lot 1. 2 April 14, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7022-C Across Cantrell Road is the Taylor Loop Road intersection, which is a signalized intersection aligning with a drive that accesses this site. To the east of the site is a strip center containing a mix of commercial and office uses. To the north of the site is vacant R-2, Single-family zoned property and to the Northeast of the site is a parcel currently zoned PCD (recently cleared of all vegetation), which is to be developed as an office/warehouse facility. South of the site is an antique mall and branch bank facility. West of the site is a single-family home located on a large tract. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Westbury Neighborhood Association, the Westchester Neighborhood Association, the Secluded Hills Neighborhood Association, all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified located, within 300 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: No comment on proposed reduction in the setback line or buffer zone. All previous comments on the PCD continue to apply. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easement, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connection off the private fire system. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be 3 April 14, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7022-C completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. 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). 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. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express. F. I SSU ES/TEC H N I CAUD ES I G N: Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) for a decreased buffer between the edge of the property and parking lot. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial running east and west through this area and is built as a five -lane road through this section. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas, Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Pian: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance. This action would reduce the landscape buffer to 10 feet adjacent to an area shown as Single Family. This could also cause unnecessary removal of trees in order to accommodate the development of uses possible in a Commercial area. 2 April 14, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7022-C Landscape: Because of the ten -foot wide utility easement, the proposed northern landscape buffer width is 3,980 square feet less than the 25 -foot width required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (March 24, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was a revision to a previously approved PCD to allow the buffer areas along the northern and western perimeters to be reduced. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process and requested Mr. McGetrick provide details of the proposed screening along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff stated the previous approval included additional plantings at one and one-half times the typical ordinance requirement and an eight -foot tall fence along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff also stated the site plan did not allow for pedestrian connectivity through the site. Staff requested the applicant indicate areas dedicated for pedestrian access by the addition of pedestrian tables and or landscaped areas designed for pedestrian connectivity. Staff stated the properties located to the north and west of the site were currently zoned R-2, Single-family. Staff requested the applicant remove all the service elements from the rear of the proposed building including the indicated dumpsters and the head -in parking located to the north of the site. Landscape comments were addressed. Staff stated because of the ten -foot wide utility easement, the proposed northern landscape buffer width was 3,980 square feet less than the 25 -foot width required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff also stated a six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, was required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff stated an irrigation system to water landscaped areas would be required. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. 5 April 14, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont. H. ANALYSIS: FILE NO.: Z -7022-C The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the March 24, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a six foot screening fence will be placed along the northern and western perimeters of the site. The applicant has also indicated landscaping will be added on the applicant's side of the proposed fence but not at the rate of the previous approval. The applicant has indicated pedestrian access through the site to allow connection to Cantrell Road. The applicant has not removed the proposed parking nor the proposed dumpsters located behind the proposed building. Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The site was reviewed through an overall development plan for the Cantrell Loops Long -form PCD. The site plan as proposed does not meet the minimum Highway 10 Design Overlay standards with regard to landscaping, building setbacks or buffering. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District typically requires a minimum building setback of 40 -feet along the rear property line and 30 -feet along the side property line. Although, the proposed site plan indicates a 40 -foot building setback along the rear property line, a 15 -foot building setback is proposed along the western or side property line. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District Ordinance also requires the rear and side yards to have a landscaped buffer averaging 25 -feet from the property line independent of easements. The entirety of the proposed landscaping along the rear property line is contained within a drainage and utility easement and 10 -feet of the proposed landscaping and buffering along the western property line is located within a drainage and utility easement and does not provide the 25 -foot minimum landscape strip as was previously approved for this site. Staff is not supportive of allowing the utility easement to serve as the required landscaping and buffering. The property to the west is currently zoned and used as residential. The property to the north is currently zoned and shown of the Future Land Use Plan as residential. Although, it is unlikely the property to the west will remain a residential use in the long term, staff feels the area should be protected until redevelopment occurs. A proposal was reviewed and approved by the Commission at their January 20, 2005, Public Hearing to allow Lot 3 (the lot immediately east of the site) to utilize the utility easement as their required landscape strip but the applicant proposed to maintain a consistent 30 - foot landscape strip. Staff feels the applicant should maintain the landscaping strip as was approved immediately east of the site. Staff also feels the applicant's proposal should not intrude into the rear yard area. The site located to the north is zoned as single-family and shown on the City's Future Land Use Plan as residential. Staff feels the placement of the proposed parking and dumpsters in this area is intrusive and makes the property less desirable for single-family development. Staff feels all intrusive activities, such 0 April 14, 2005 SUBDIVISION EM NO.: 5 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7022-C as parking and dumpster locations, should be internalized and allow the rear of the buildings to act as an additional screening mechanism. Staff feels the development is inappropriate for the site as proposed based on the level of activity proposed for the rear of the site and the reduction of the required buffers and landscaping. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 14, 2005) Mr. John Rees was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated the applicant was requesting the placement of signage, which exceeded the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standard. Staff also stated the proposed development did not comply with the Overlay with regard to landscaping and building setbacks. Staff stated the previously approved site plan did not meet all the requirements of the Overlay but did come closer to meeting the intent than the applicant's request. Staff stated they were not supportive of allowing activity on the rear of the site. Staff stated they felt the dumpsters should be relocated along with the indicated parking located at the rear of the building. Mr. Rees addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated his request was to redevelop the site as a commercial center. He stated he felt the dumpster location was more appropriate and shielded from Highway 10. He stated the had contacted the property owner located to the west of the site and the property owner had requested the dumpsters be placed in the rear of the building to locate them further from his home. Mr. Rees stated the indicted parking was for employee parking only, who would not generate a great deal of in and out traffic per day. Mr. Rees stated the indicated signage had been lowered from thirty-six feet in height to sixteen feet in height. He stated the sign was to be a monument style sign and located 300 -feet from the Highway 10 right-of-way. Mr. Mike Saar addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he was President of the Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association and the Association was not supportive of development, which did not maintain the integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the League of Women Voters also agreed with staff that the integrity of the Overlay should be maintained when developments occurred. She stated it felt as if the Highway 10 Design Overlay District was a moving target and she did not feel revising a VA April 14, 2005 SUBDIV[SION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7022-C PZD prior to seeing if the approved development would work was not a good practice. She stated it appeared the only benefit to the revision would be to the developer to allow him additional building square footage on the site. She stated the landscaping indicated on the site plan was contained totally within a utility easement and it was not common practice to allow utility easements to count as required landscaping. Ms. Bell stated the perception was that a developer could get a PZD approved for one thing and then come back and revise the PZD to get another. She stated the approved development would not always work but it was important to give a development time to see if the development would work before making changes. Ms. Celia Martin did not wish to speak but noted she was opposed to the proposed request. Mr. Rees stated his desire was to gain staff approval. He stated he had met with Bob Brown to resolve issues related to the indicated landscaping. He stated the revised plan did allow for the required landscaping treatment along the rear of the site. He stated the property to the west would not likely remain residential in the long term and his proposed plan allowed protection for the current resident. Mr. Bob Brown of the Planning staff addressed the Commission on the merits of the proposed landscaping. He stated the indicated site plan did meet with the required landscaping along the northern property line but not along the southern property line. He stated the western buffer did not appear to comply with the Overlay requirement. Mr. Brown stated the Highway 10 Design Overlay District did allow for easements to satisfy landscaping requirements. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. It was noted the area to the north would not likely develop as a residential use due to the large amount of fill required too remove the site from the floodplain. It was also noted the developed areas on the site were allowed parking facing into the residential properties. Mr. Rees stated he was willing to amend his application to reduce the overall sign area to six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area as was typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 5 noes and 0 absent. 0 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z - NAME: Cantrell Loops Lot 2 Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: located on the North side of Cantrell Road at Taylor Loop Road 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. 2. Provide details of the proposed screening along the northern and western perimeters of the site. The previous approval included additional plantings at one and one-half times the typical ordinance requirement and an eight -foot tall fence along the northern and western perimeters of the site. 3. Provide the proposed uses of the proposed development. 4. Will there be a ground mounted sign added to the site? If so indicate the location along with the total height and sign area. 5. Provide a scale and north arrow on the proposed site plan. 6. The indicate site plan does not allow for pedestrian connectivity through the site. Indicated areas dedicated for pedestrian access by the addition of pedestrian tables and or landscaped areas designed for pedestrian connectivity. 7. The site plan indicates the hours of operation from 7 am to 7 pm seven days per week. Are the indicated hours correct? 8. Remove all the service elements from the rear of the proposed building including the indicated dumpsters and the head -in parking located to the north of the site. 9. Clearly identify the 30 -foot access easement more specifically specify the location where the easement ends to the north. Variance/Waivers: None requested. Public Works Conditions: No comment on proposed reduction in the setback line or buffer zone. All previous comments on the PCD continue to apply. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easement, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. 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). 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. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express. Planning Division: Landscape: Because of the ten -foot wide utility easement, the proposed northern landscape buffer width is 3,980 square feet less than the 25 -foot width required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, March 30, 2005.