Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7281-A Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-7281 NAME: Threadgill Short -form PD -R LOCATION: 12800 Arthur Lane DEVELOPER: Richard Threadgill 2303 East Grand Avenue Hot Springs, AR 71901 AREA: 0.46 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD -R ENGINEER: Donald Brooks 20880 Arch Street Hensley, AR 72065 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USE: Residential — Townhouse development (6 units total or 13 units per acre) VARIAN CES/WAIVE RS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: At the September 19, 2002 Public Hearing of the Planning Commission, an application for the placement of eight units of townhouse development was denied. The Commission also voted to allow the applicant to resubmit a site plan at a lesser density without paying a filing fee should the applicant resubmit a plan within a three-month time period. The Commission also indicated the applicant would not be required to file a Land Use Plan amendment if the proposal was a lesser density. FILE NO.: Z -7281-A Cont. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the placement of six (6) townhouse residential units on these three lots. There are three (3) units proposed to be located on the south property line (to back-up to Arthur Lane) and three (3) units to be located along the north property line. There will be a single concrete drive access point to the site from Atkins Road entering the center of the development. Units 2 and 5 are proposed at 1440 square feet with a 240 square foot garage. Units 1, 3, 4 and 6 are proposed at 1656 square feet with a 240 square foot garage. The applicant has indicated all units will be two-story. The units will consist of concrete block foundation, concrete slab on the first floor, wood framing, drywall interiors, composition shingles and brick and vinyl siding exteriors. The applicant has also indicated a six (6) foot wood fence along the north, south and west property lines and a wrought iron fence along the street side of Atkins Road. The development will utilize city garbage pick-up with residents taking their trash to the street side. The applicant has stated the units are for resale as individual homes and a Property Owners Association will be formed for maintenance and upkeep of the common areas. The applicant has indicated street improvements will be constructed to Arthur Lane and Atkins Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains three lots one of which (the western -most lot) contains a single- family residence facing Arthur Lane. The site is zoned R-2, single-family as is the area surrounding the site and is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. The area to the east is a developed single-family subdivision (Point West Subdivision) and the area to the north and west are developed with single- family residences. The area to the south of the site from Atkins Road to Nix Road is vacant (with the exception of a few homes located on Atkins Road) down to Kanis Road. Atkins Road is a two lane roadway with curb and gutter on the east side of the road with no sidewalk. Arthur Lane is a narrow chip seal roadway with no curb, gutter or sidewalk adjacent to the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Parkway Place and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Associations, all residents, who could be identified, within 300 -feet 2 FILE NO.: Z-7281 of the site and all property owners within 200 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. Staff has received several phone calls and letters in opposition to the proposed development. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Atkins Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Arthur Lane is classified on the Master Street Plan as a residential street. Dedicate right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline. 3. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at Atkins Road and Arthur Lane. 4. Provide design of the streets conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with the planned development. Sidewalks must be continuous across all street frontage with. appropriate handicap ramps. 5. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Curb radius of driveway at Atkins needs to be 10' minimum. 6. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional details at 688-1414. AP & L: No comment received. ARKLA: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water:A water main extension, installed at the expense of the developer, will be required to provide domestic service and adequate fire protection. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the expense of the developer. An acreage charge of $600.00 per acre and a development fee based on the size of the connection currently applies in addition to normal charges in the area. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 319-3752 for additional details. 3 FILE NO.: Z -72 81-A Cont. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is located on Bus Route #5 and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development -- Residential to build a six (6) unit townhouse development. The applicant previously filed a Land Use Plan Amendment with his proposal which was heard at the September 19, 2002 Public Hearing (LU02-18-04) and was denied by the Commission. It was Staff's understanding the applicant would not be required to file a Land Use Plan amendment if he resubmitted his proposal at a lesser density, although the density proposed with the current development plan results in 13 units per acre or multifamily density. City Reco nixed Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Residential Development goal is supported by an objective of encouraging lower density development in the area to act as a buffer between single family and more intense non-residential uses. Action Statements include using multi -family housing to act as a buffer between office and single-family uses and limiting the density and square footage of multi -family developments. Landscapes: The plan submitted falls short of the required nine (9) foot wide land use buffer along the northern and southern perimeters of the site. Additionally, a portion of the landscape strip west of the proposed paved area drops below the 6.7 -foot minimum width requirement of the Landscape Ordinance. A water source within seventy-five (75) feet of all landscaped areas will be required. The face side of the proposed wood fence must be directed outward. Building Codes: No comment received. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 29, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. the item to the Committee noting additions, which were needed (Signage, height of the wrought iron fence). Staff noted the proposal before the Commission at their September 19, 2002 Staff stated the applicant had reduced the density and development plan. 4 Staff presented on the site plan applicant had a Public Hearing. resubmitted his FILE NO.: Z-7281-A(Cont. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated street improvements would be required to both Atkins Road and Arthur Lane. Staff also stated a 20 -foot radial dedication would be required at the intersection of the two roadways. The applicant indicated he would construct Y2 street improvements to both streets. .11 Staff noted comments from the various utility companies noting a sewer main extension and a water main extension would be required along with easements. There being no further issues to discuss, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. K ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to Staff addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has indicated patios to be attached to each structure within the side yard setback located two (2) feet off the property line. A six (6) foot open-air wood fence will separate the units and act as a screen. The applicant proposes a six (6) foot wooden fence located along the north, south and west property lines with a six (6) foot wrought iron fence along the street side of Atkins Road. The landscaping along the north and south property lines is insufficient when the patios are added. The landscaping strip along the northern and southern perimeter should maintain a minimum of nine (9) feet in width and at no point fall below 6.7 -feet. The addition of the patio in this area leaves a minimal side yard setback (2 -feet). The applicant has indicated the area will be surrounded by a six-foot wooden fence and even if a setback were in place and landscaping installed the adjoining property owners would not see the area. (The reduction is a land use buffer issue and the reduction maybe approved by the Planning Commission.) Staff is supportive of the reduction of landscaped area since the applicant has increased the street buffer area and has increased the buffer area adjoining the single-family to the west. The applicant has also increased the number of trees proposed in this area to act as future screening from the second floor of the units. The applicant has narrowed the turnaround along the western driveway and proposed the installation of flat landscaping stones and mondo grass between the stones to allow for additional landscaping in the turn -around. Staff is supportive of this request. The stones add a residential character to the development and the addition of the grasses will break the hard surface areas. Although, Staff was not supportive of the previous proposal Staff feels the current density could be workable with the neighborhood. The proposed development results in 13 units per acre on three (3) previously platted lots. The proposed development includes six (6) units, which is double the number of units allowable 5 FILE NO.: Z -7281-A Cont. by right on the site. Staff feels comfortable with the proposed density on the site. The applicant is proposing two story buildings. The building height proposed is not any higher than a two-story single-family home, which could be constructed on the site. Staff feels window placement is important so as to not intrude on the single-family residence located west and north of the site. The applicant has indicated the second story will not have windows facing the western property line. The applicant has also indicated the placement of trees along the western perimeter to further screen the homes to the west. The applicant has indicated street improvements will be constructed to Atkins Road and to Arthur Lane. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested Planned Residential Development for Threadgill Short -form PD -R subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D, E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Chairman Faust stated the Planning Commission's policy was to allow the applicant a deferral option when fewer than nine (9) Planning Commissioners were present. She stated there were only six (6) Commissioners present. Mr. Threadgill requested the item be deferred to the November 14, 2002 Public Hearing. There was no further discussion. A motion was made to defer the item and approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 5 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Chairman Lowry stated the Planning Commission's policy was to allow the applicant a deferral option when fewer than nine (9) Planning Commissioners were present. He stated there were only eight (8) Commissioners present. Mr. Threadgill requested the item be deferred to the December 19, 2002 Public Hearing. There was no further discussion. A motion was made to defer the item and approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. R FILE NO.: Z -7281-A Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 19, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated although the development equated to 13 units per acre the development was double the density currently allowed or six (5) units instead of three (3) units. Ms. Ruth Bell, League of Women's Voters of Pulaski County, spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the density proposed was too great for the area. She also stated the design of the development did not lend itself to the character of the neighborhood. She questioned if the units were to be renter or owner occupied. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the units would be owner occupied. Ms. Mary Douglas spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the design of the proposed development was not compatible with the neighborhood or with the concept of new urbanism. She stated the demand of town home buyers was more for the trend of a detached housing feel although the units were attached. Ms. Douglas stated the area around the site was developed to the north with smaller homes on larger lots. She stated the front of the buildings were not facing the street as would enhance the proposed development. She also stated the scale of the development did not fit with the neighb6rhood. Ms. Douglas stated the change in the zoning would be a change to multi -family in the heart of a single-family neighborhood. She stated the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan called for a balance of office and multi -family in the area and the change would not maintain that balance. Ms. Shirley McFarland spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the area nearer Markham Street was previously zoned for an office development in which only one office building had been constructed. She also stated in an unscientific survey of the area driving west only there were 5 apartment complexes with 1400 rental units and numerous small scale townhouse developments within a five (5) minute drive area. She stated the rents in the area ranges from $500 -$1000 per month. Ms. McFarland stated that Mr. Threadgill had indicated he would offer these units for sale at a sales price of $120,000 to $1.25,000 per unit. She stated the Census median sales price for a condo unit in the areas was only $95,600. She stated the units were priced well above the median price range. Ms. McFarland stated the area residents were opposed to the rezoning request. She stated this should be apparent by the sixty-one (61) signatures previously submitted in opposition to the proposed development. Commissioner Faust stated she was not supportive of the proposed development even though she was an advocate for mixing densities. She stated the proposed 7 FILE NO.: Z -7281-A Cont. development did not take in consideration scale and compatibility to the neighborhood. She stated the proposed development would be a better fit to the neighborhood if the buildings were oriented towards the street. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the density. Commissioner Faust questioned Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, as to the areas that could be considered when approving a planned development. Mr. Giles stated in a planned development the Commission could require and impose conditions on an application as a condition of approval_ A motion was made to accept the application as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 3 noes and 3 absent. L December 19, 2002 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7281 -A NAME: Threadgill Short -form PD -R LOCATION: 12800 Arthur Lane DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Richard Threadgill Donald Brooks 2303 East Grand Avenue 20880 Arch Street Hot Springs, AR 71901 Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.46 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD -R PROPOSED USE: Residential — Townhouse development (6 units total or 13 units per acre) VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: At the September 19, 2002 Public Hearing of the Planning Commission, an application for the placement of eight units of townhouse development was denied. The Commission also voted to allow the applicant to resubmit a site plan at a lesser density without paying a filing fee should the applicant resubmit a plan within a three-month time period. The Commission also indicated the applicant would not be required to file a Land Use Plan amendment if the proposal was a lesser density. December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: ❑ Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7281-A A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the placement of six (6) townhouse residential units on these three lots. There are three (3) units proposed to be located on the south property line (to back-up to Arthur Lane) and three (3) units to be located along the north property line. There will be a single concrete drive access point to the site from Atkins Road entering the center of the development. Units 2 and 5 are proposed at 1440 square feet with a 240 square foot garage. Units 1, 3, 4 and 6 are proposed at 1656 square feet with a 240 square foot garage. The applicant has indicated all units will be two-story. The units will consist of concrete block foundation, concrete slab on the first floor, wood framing, drywall interiors, composition shingles and brick and vinyl siding exteriors. The applicant has also indicated a six (6) foot wood fence along the north, south and west property lines and a wrought iron fence along the street side of Atkins Road. The development will utilize city garbage pick-up with residents taking their trash to the street side. The applicant has stated the units are for resale as individual homes and a Property Owners Association will be formed for maintenance and upkeep of the common areas. The applicant has indicated street improvements will be constructed to Arthur Lane and Atkins Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains three lots one of which (the western -most lot) contains a single- family residence facing Arthur Lane. The site is zoned R-2, single-family as is the area surrounding the site and is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. The area to the east is a developed single-family subdivision (Point West Subdivision) and the area to the north and west are developed with single- family residences. The area to the south of the site from Atkins Road to Nix Road is vacant (with the exception of a few homes located on Atkins Road) down to Kanis Road. Atkins Road is a two lane roadway with curb and gutter on the east side of the road with no sidewalk. Arthur Lane is a narrow chip seal roadway with no curb, gutter or sidewalk adjacent to the site. 2 December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7281 -A C X E NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Parkway Place and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Associations, all residents, who could be identified, within 300 -feet of the site and all property owners within 200 -feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. Staff has received several phone calls and letters in opposition to the proposed development. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Atkins Road is classified on the Master Street Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Arthur Lane is classified on"the Master Street Dedicate right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline. 3. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is Arthur Lane. Plan as a commercial street. Plan as a residential street. required at Atkins Road and 4. Provide design of the streets conforming to MSP (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with the planned development. Sidewalks must be continuous across all street frontage with appropriate handicap ramps. 5. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Curb radius of driveway at Atkins needs to be 10' minimum. 6. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENTICOUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional details at 688-1414. AP & L: No comment received. ARKLA: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water:A water main extension, installed at the expense of the developer, will be required to provide domestic service and adequate fire protection. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the expense of the 3 December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7281-A developer. An acreage charge of $600.00 per acre and a development fee based on the size of the connection currently applies in addition to normal charges in the area. Contact Central Arkansas Water -at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 319-3752 for additional details. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is located on Bus Route #5 and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAUDESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development — Residential to build a six (6) unit townhouse development. The applicant previously filed a Land Use Plan Amendment with his proposal which was heard at the September 19, 2002 Public Hearing (LU02-18-04) and was denied by the Commission. It was Staff's understanding the applicant would not be required to file a Land Use Plan amendment if he resubmitted his proposal at a lesser density, although the density proposed with the current development plan results in 13 units per acre or multifamily density. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Residential Development goal is supported by an objective of encouraging lower density development in the area to act as a buffer between single family and more intense non-residential uses. Action Statements include using multi -family housing to act as a buffer between office and single-family uses and limiting the density and square footage of multi -family developments. Landscape; The plan submitted falls short of the required nine (9) foot wide land use buffer along the northern and southern perimeters of the site. Additionally, a portion of the landscape strip west of the proposed paved area drops below the 6.7 -foot minimum width requirement of the Landscape Ordinance. A water source within seventy. -five (75) feet of all landscaped areas will be required. The face side of the proposed wood fence must be directed outward. Building Codes: No comment received. 4 December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO_: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7281-A G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 29, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. Staff presented the item to the Committee noting additions, which were needed on the site plan (Signage, height of the wrought iron fence). Staff noted the applicant had a proposal before the Commission at their September 19, 2002 Public Hearing. Staff stated the applicant had reduced the density and resubmitted his development plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated street improvements would be required to both Atkins Road and Arthur Lane. Staff also stated a 20 -foot radial dedication would be required at the intersection of the two roadways. The applicant indicated he would construct 1/2 street improvements to both streets. Staff noted comments from the various utility companies noting a sewer main extension and a water main extension would be required along with easements. There being no further issues to discuss, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to Staff addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has indicated patios to be attached to each structure within the side yard setback located two (2) feet off the property line. A six (6) foot open-air wood fence will separate the units and act as a screen. The applicant proposes a six (6) foot wooden fence located along the north, south and west property lines with a six (6) foot wrought iron fence along the street side of Atkins Road. The landscaping along the north and south property lines is insufficient when the patios are added. The landscaping strip along the northern and southern perimeter should maintain a minimum of nine (9) feet in width and at no point fall below 6.7 -feet. The addition of the patio in this area leaves a minimal side yard setback (2 -feet). The applicant has indicated the area will be surrounded by a six-foot wooden fence and even if a setback were in place and landscaping installed the adjoining property owners would not see the area. (The reduction is a land use buffer issue and the reduction maybe approved by the Planning Commission.) Staff is supportive of the reduction of landscaped area since the applicant has increased the street buffer area and has increased the buffer area adjoining the single-family to the west. The applicant has also increased the number of trees proposed in this area to act as future screening from the second floor of the units. 5 December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7281-A The applicant has narrowed the turnaround along the western driveway and proposed the installation of flat landscaping stones and mondo grass between the stones to allow for additional landscaping in the turn -around. Staff is supportive of this request. The stones add a residential character to the development and the addition of the grasses will break the hard surface areas. Although, Staff was not supportive of the previous proposal Staff feels the current density could be workable with the neighborhood. The proposed development results in 13 units per acre on three (3) previously platted lots. The proposed development includes six (6) units, which is double the number of units allowable by right on the site. Staff feels comfortable with the proposed density on the site. The applicant is proposing two story buildings. The building height proposed is not any higher than a two-story single-family home, which could be constructed on the site. Staff feels window placement is important so as to not intrude on the single-family residence located west and north of the site. The applicant has indicated the second story will not have windows facing the western property line. The applicant has also indicated the placement of trees along the western perimeter to further screen the homes to the west. The applicant has indicated street improvements will be constructed to Atkins Road and to Arthur Lane. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested Planned Residential Development for Threadgill Short -form PD -R subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D, E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Chairman Faust stated the Planning Commission's policy was to allow the applicant a deferral option when fewer than nine (9) Planning Commissioners were present. She stated there were only six (6) Commissioners present. Mr. Threadgill requested the item be deferred to the November 14, 2002 Public Hearing. There was no further discussion. A motion was made to defer the item and approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 5 absent. 0 December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -7281-A PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Chairman Lowry stated the Planning Commission's policy was to allow the applicant a deferral option when fewer than nine (9) Planning Commissioners were present. He stated there were only eight (8) Commissioners present. Mr. Threadgill requested the item be deferred to the December 19, 2002 Public Hearing. There was no further discussion. A motion was made to defer the item and approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 19, 2002) Mr. Richard Threadgill was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated although the development equated to 13 units per acre the development was double the density currently allowed or six (6) units instead of three (3) units. Ms. Ruth Bell, League of Women's Voters of Pulaski County, spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the density proposed was too great for the area. She also stated the design of the development did not lend itself to the character of the neighborhood. She questioned if the units were to be renter or owner occupied. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the units would be owner occupied. Ms. Mary Douglas spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the design of the proposed development was not compatible with the neighborhood or with the concept of new urbanism. She stated the demand of town home buyers was more for the trend of a detached housing feel although the units were attached. Ms. Douglas stated the area around the site was developed to the north with smaller homes on larger lots. She stated the front of the buildings were not facing the street as would enhance the proposed development. She also stated the scale of the development did not fit with the neighborhood. Ms. Douglas stated the change in the zoning would be a change to multi -family in the heart of a single-family neighborhood. She stated the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan called for a balance of office and multi -family in the area and the change would not maintain that balance. Ms. Shirley McFarland spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the area nearer Markham Street was previously zoned for an office development in which only one office building had been constructed. She also stated in an unscientific survey of the area driving west only there were 5 apartment complexes with 1400 rental 7 December 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-7281 -A units and numerous small scale townhouse developments within a five (5) minute drive area. She stated the rents in the area ranges from $500 -$1000 per month. Ms. McFarland stated that Mr. Threadgill ha( sale at a sales price of $120,000 to $125,000 sales price for a condo unit in the areas was priced well above the median price range. indicated he would offer these units for per unit. She stated the Census median only $95,600. She stated the units were Ms. McFarland stated the area residents were opposed to the rezoning request. She stated this should be apparent by the sixty-one (61) signatures previously submitted in opposition to the proposed development. Commissioner Faust stated she was not supportive of the proposed development even though she was an advocate for mixing densities. She stated the proposed development did not take in consideration scale and compatibility to the neighborhood. She stated the proposed development would be a better fit to the neighborhood if the buildings were oriented towards the street. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the density. Commissioner Faust questioned Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, as to the areas that could be considered when approving a planned development. Mr. Giles stated in a planned development the Commission could require and impose conditions on an application as a condition of approval. A motion was made to accept the application as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 3 noes and 3 absent. E: Subdivision Committee Meeting October 10, 2002 ITEM NO.: D NAME: Threadgill Short -form PD -R FILE NO.: Z -7281-A LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Arthur Lane and Atkins Road AREA: 0.46 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD -R PROPOSED USE: Townhouse development FT. NEW STREET: 0 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Provide location of any proposed signage and give details (height/area). 2. Any site lighting must be low level and directed away from residentially zoned property. 3. Provide the maximum building height. 4. Dimension the building setback from all property line. 5. Give details of building materials. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. All comments from previous proposal apply. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy; ARKLA: C`t l . Subdivision Committee Meeting October 10, 2002 Southwestern Bell: Water: A water main extension, installed at the expense of the developer, will be required to provide domestic service and adequate fire protection. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public/private fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the expense of the developer. An acreage charge of $600.00 per acre and a development fee based on the size of the connection currently applies in addition to normal charges in the area. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Little Rock Fire Department at 319-3752 for additional details. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is located not located on a dedicated bus route and has no -effect on bus radius, turnout and route. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning_Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development — Residential to build an eight (8) unit townhouse development. A Land Use Plan Amendment is a separate item on the agenda (LU02-18-04) Cit _gnized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Residential Development goal is supported by an objective of encouraging lower density development in the area. Action Statements include using multi -family housing to act as a buffer between office and single-family uses and limiting the density and square footage of multi -family developments. Landscape: The plan submitted falls short of the required nine (9) foot wide land use buffer along the northern perimeter of the site. Additionally, a portion of the landscape strip west of the proposed paved area drops below the 6.7 -foot minimum width requirement of the Landscape Ordinance. A water source within seventy-five (75) feet of all landscaped areas will be required. The face side of the proposed wood fence must be directed outward. Building Codes: No comment. Subdivision Committee Meeting October 10, 2002 REVISED PLAT/PLAN: SUBMIT FOUR (4) COPIES OF A REVISED SITE PLAN (TO INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS NOTED ABOVE) TO STAFF NO LATER THAN NOON ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2002.