Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7722-A Staff AnalysisAugust 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11. NAME: Lagniappe Revised Short -form PD -R Lots 1 - 4 Lagniappe Addition LOCATION: located on the Northwest corner of Walnut and I Streets DEVELOPER: Lagniappe Addition, LLC 2106 Beechwood Little Rock, AR 72207 Bill Rector 300 South Izard Street Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.0 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -R ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential — four lots and two tracts PROPOSED ZONING: PD -R PROPOSED USE: Single-family Residential VARIAN CESIWAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19,241 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 7, 2004, established Lagniappe Short -form PD -R. The applicant proposed the redevelopment of the site, previously platted as six lots, with a four lots and a two tract development through a PD -R. Two of the lots were approved as pipe -stem lots served by a 16 -foot paved drive and a 30 -foot access and utility easement extending from "I" Street near the intersection with Walnut Street. A fifteen foot building line was approved along "I" Street. The side yards within the development were proposed as six feet. August 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO: Z - A minimum square footage of heated and cooled space for the homes was 2,500 square feet. The maximum square footage of the homes along I Street was limited to 3,500 square feet and 4,500 square feet on the rear two homes. The maximum building height was limited to 32 -feet. A maximum building coverage of 28 percent without garages and 32 percent, including the garage, was approved. The applicant also indicated the construction materials would be compatible with existing exteriors in the area. The applicant indicated stone, brick, stucco, cobblestone, cypress or non -vinyl siding, antique cypress and pine beams would be added to the new homes. All windows and doors were wood and the roof constructed of asphalt shingles, wood shingles or clay roof tiles. Possible features of the new construction were antique gates, wrought iron railings, antique doors and windows and clay chimney caps. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is proposing an amendment to the previously approved PD -R for Lots 1 — 4 of Lagniappe Addition to allow the site to comply with previously imposed condition for lot coverage. The original PD -R included several restrictions including maximum square footage of houses (3500 square feet on Lots 1 and 2, 4,500 square feet on Lots 3 and 4), maximum roof height (32 feet) and a maximum lot coverage of 32 percent. According to the applicant, these restrictions were included in an effort to address neighborhood concerns, specifically those of the Hillcrest Resident's Association. Infrastructure work began in March of 2005 which included the addition of a fire hydrant to bring not only the proposed lots into compliance with the city fire code, but also existing homes in the neighborhood that were not in compliance. Water and sewer system improvements were constructed which included replacing the 50 year old water line between Ash and Walnut Streets with a new 3 inch line benefiting each homeowner's property on the block and new 6 inch sewer access installed for the houses west of 4400 1 Street. The new 6 inch sewer access was done at the request of the City and in no way benefited the developers project. A private drive for access to Lots 3 and 4 was also completed. After completing the above mentioned infrastructure work, the developers submitted detailed plans, drawings and lot survey to the City of Little Rock for the issuance of a building permit. The permit was issued to Pursell Construction by the City of Little Rock on February 27, 2006 after which construction commenced on Lot 2. On May 18, 2006, at the request of the Hillcrest Resident's Association, a field audit was conducted by the City of Little Rock. It was determined that while the square footage, roof height, and other restrictions of the PD -R were in compliance, the percentage of lot coverage, which was built in accordance with plans submitted to and approved by the City, was in excess of the 32 percent allowed. According to the developers, this was unintentional and an oversight on the part of the applicant as well as the City. Currently, the construction is essentially in the "dry." A cease work order was issued by the City on May 23, 2006. The request also includes the placement of ornamental iron architectural features that do not extend into the side yard set back more that 36 inches, as typically allowed by City Code. The original PD -R included the approval of iron railings E August 3, 2006 : 11 (Cont,) FILE NO: Z-7722 A but did not specify the location of the railings or the extension of decks porches and patios within the required setback. No other revisions to the existing PD -R are being requested. The developers are requesting the typical ordinance standards for R-2, Single-family zoned property apply for issues not specifically addressed in the PD -R. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single family home currently under construction on Lot 2 with a building footprint of 3,127 square feet or 42.8 percent building coverage. The four lots and two tracts have been final platted. There are single-family homes located in the area and Alsop Park is located to the north. "I" Street has been widened to Master Street Plan standard abutting the proposed development. The area is characterized by single-family homes located on 50 -foot by 150 -foot lots; many of the homes sitting on two lots. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents located within 300 - feet of the site, who could be identified, were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works; 1. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. Erosion controls must be installed to protect downstream properties. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main on site constructed with easements in 2006. Any changes in planned subdivision may require relocation or extension of existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. 3 August 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11(Cont.)-FILE NO: Z-7722 A F Fe - Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Enerav: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Maintain a 20 -foot driveway width. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has requested a revision of a previously approved Planned Residential Development to modify the previously imposed conditions concerning total allowed building coverage. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: I Street is shown as a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Pian: A Class III Bike Route is shown on Kavanaugh Boulevard and Beechwood Street. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal has these objective(s) relevant to this case: "Adopt a plan of action to stop the degradation, to reverse its course, and to recreate a neighborhood that is once again a pleasant place to work and live. This includes no net loss of residential units by demolition or conversion to other uses." Landscape: No comment. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 13, 2006) Larry and Martha Chisenhall were present representing the request. Staff presented the item indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff noted the proposal as submitted indicated the adjustment of a 4 August 3, 2006 I�� ►��i��[�I�iil FILE NO: Z-7722 A lot line to allow the proposed development to come into compliance with the maximum lot coverage allow per the approved PD -R. Staff stated there were other options being considered for the proposed request; one being increasing the lot coverage for Lot 2 and reducing the allowable building height for the remaining lots. Staff stated the developers, staff and the neighborhood were working to determine the best approach for resolution. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no outstanding issues associated with the request remaining from the July 13, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. Based on a meeting with the developers, the adjoining property owners and the Hillcrest Resident's Neighborhood Association, there were concessions made for modifications to the approved site plan and the approved PD -R. The approved PD -R allow for minimum setbacks, maximum square footages of the homes, maximum building coverage and maximum building heights. Based on a City audit of the site it was determined the structure currently under construction was in compliance with all previously imposed conditions with the exception of the total building coverage. The proposed revision would allow the coverage ratio for existing Lot 2 to be amended from 32 percent to 42 percent or as built, to reflect the current building footprint. The coverage ratio for Lot 1 will be increased from 32 percent to 38 percent and the 32 percent coverage ratio will remain for Lots 3 and 4. Lot 1 was approved with a six foot side yard setback along the west side. The developers are proposing Lot 1 to have a 10 foot set back, as opposed to the existing 6 foot set back, on the west side of Lot 1. With the increased space between Lot 1 and Lot 2, the dwelling on Lot 2 will be allowed to have a cantilevered deck on the east side of the dwelling not to exceed 45 inches in depth. In addition, the applicant is proposing the allowance of a decorative iron railing, not exceeding 36 inches in depth on the west side of the Lot 2 dwelling. No "unfinished" space will be included in dwellings built on Lots 1, 3 and 4. Unfinished space is defined as enclosed, floored space that in the future could be heated and cooled and has dimensions that meet the City's requirements for occupiable space. This restriction is not intended to prohibit a garage intended for parking vehicles, storage or workshop space opening off the garage, space to house mechanical equipment, or unfinished attic or eave space as long as such space is not heated and cooled. The original approval allowed for a six foot side yard setback along the common 5 August 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11(Cont.) FILE NO: Z-7722 A lot line of Lots 3 and 4. The revision would increase this setback to a 15 foot set back from the north line of Lot 3 and the south line of Lot 4. This setback does not include decks which will be allowed to extend into the setback Y2 of the setback in this area. In addition, the same encroachment of decks applies to Lots 1 and 4. Deck space will not be considered in the calculation of any coverage ratio. The applicant has defined maximum building height. The maximum height for dwellings on Lots 1, 3 and 4 will be no more than 35 feet to the highest point on the roof ridge line from the average ground elevation within the foundation perimeter before any grading takes place. If there are to be multi-level roof ridge lines, the 35 foot measurement is to be taken from the average ground elevation within the perimeter of the foundation of that part of the structure supporting each roof ridge line. As required by City Ordinances, all construction materials will be confined to developer's property with no items stored in the public right-of-way between the sidewalk and the street. The working hours to be observed are pursuant to City code or ordinance which are as follows: Monday through Friday from 6 am to 6 pm, Saturday from 7 am to 6 pm and Sunday from 1 pm to 6 pm. Interior work is allowed Monday through Saturday as allowed for exterior work hours with the work hours increasing to an ending time to 10 pm. As a courtesy to the neighbors there is to be no loud music played by workers on the site. In summary the proposed amendments to the PD -R are as follow: • Lot coverage for Lot 2 is to be 42%, including garages, or as built • Lot coverage for Lot 1 is to be 38%, including garages • Lot coverage for Lots 3 and 4 is to be 32%, including garages • Lot 1 west side yard setback is 10 -feet • Lot 2 is permitted to have cantilevered deck on the east side not to exceed 45" in depth • Lot 2 permitted to have an architectural embellishment extending out not to exceed 36" in depth and enclosed with a decorative railing on the west side • Building height on Lot 2 to be as the structure is now built • Building height on Lots 1, 3 and 4 is to be no more than 35 feet to the highest point on the roof ridge line from the average ground elevation within the foundation perimeter before any grading takes place. If there are to be multi-level roof ridge lines, the 35 foot measurement is to be taken from the average ground elevation within the perimeter of the foundation of that part of the structure supporting each roof ridge line. • Construction materials are to be stored on the property C� August 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO: 2-7722 A • Working hours are to be Monday through Friday from 6 am to 6 pm, Saturday from 7 am to 6 pm and Sunday from 1 pm to 6 pm. Interior work is allowed Monday through Saturday as allowed for exterior work hours with the work hours increasing to an ending time to 10 pm. No loud music is to be played by construction workers on the site There is to be no unfinished space on Lots 1, 3 and 4. Unfinished space is defined as enclosed, floored space that in the future could be heated and cooled and has dimensions that meet the City's requirements for occupiable space. This restriction is not intended to prohibit a garage intended for parking vehicles, storage or workshop space opening off the garage, space to house mechanical equipment, or unfinished attic or eave space as long as such space is not heated and cooled. The side yard setback for the northern property line of Lot 3 shall be 15 feet. The side yard setback for the southern property line of Lot 4 shall be 15 feet. • Decks will be allowed into Y2 of the side yard setback for Lots 1, 3 and 4. Deck space will not be considered in the calculation of any coverage ratio. Staff is supportive of the amendment to the PD -R for Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Lagniappe Addition as proposed by the developers and the neighbors. To staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION; (August 3, 2006) The applicant's were present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Larry Chisenhall addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the original request was to change the lot lines between Lots 2 and 3 increasing the lot area of Lot 2 to allow the 32 percent building coverage to be met. He stated after working with the neighborhood a compromise was reached to increase the allowable coverage and defining certain aspects of the development. One of which was building height. Ms. Carol Young addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the League of Women Voters did not support the request. She stated the developers knew the rules and chose to not abide by the rules. She stated if the developers violated the rules they should not be rewarded. She stated a decision should be made to send a message to the development community. 7 August 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont. FILE NO: Z-7722 A Ms. Susan Borne addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated her home was located on Ash and I Streets just west of the site. She stated the original approval was worked on and agreed upon by the neighborhood the developers, the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors. She stated the developers did not honor the commitments made. She stated her main concerns were building height, setbacks and no net gain. She stated the unfinished space constructed in the existing home should be removed from the remaining homes yet to be constructed. She stated the developers had committed to construct homes which fit the character of the neighborhood along with providing architectural features consistent with the housing stock in the area. She stated the neighborhood had invested their lives in their homes and felt the neighborhood character should be maintained. Mr. Jim Vandenburg addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was distressed by what was being built. He stated the basic opinion was the developers had a disregard for the rules and regulations from the original agreement. He stated the 600 square feet of unfinished space looked like it could be finished with little effort. Mr. Scott Smith, President of the Hillcrest Resident's Association addressed the Commission. He stated the Resident's Association was not opposed to or in support of the request. He stated the height of the house in the rear put a spotlight on the structure. He stated with the agreement the height and setback concerns had been addressed. He stated the spacing between the houses had been increased and the lot coverage increased. He stated the basic concepts of the agreement were important to the fabric of the neighborhood. He stated the Resident's Association did not support the allowance of the 600 square feet of unfinished space. He stated the area had been floored which would allow this space to be finished with little effort by adding drywall, heat and air. He stated the area was clearly square footage which exceeded the allowable square footage contained in the home. He stated the Resident's Association was in a Grass Roots effort the define an overlay district or local ordinance district which would provide staff with technical information to help with future developments. He stated once staff was engaged they could clearly define floor area ratios and ridge heights which was included in the proposed agreement. He stated the Resident's Association supported the agreement but not the allowance of the 600 square feet of unfinished space and they felt this area should be removed from the remaining structures for a no net gain of square footage for the development. Mr. Chisenhall stated the all the imposed conditions had been met with the exception of the lot coverage. He stated the lot coverage was an oversight by both the builder and City staff. He stated the rear wall was constructed to hold up the back of the house. He stated once the area was defined it was floored for storage. He stated the area was never intended for livable space. He stated the house under construction was less than the allowable 3,500 square feet. He stated a total of 16,000 square feet was allowed through the approval contained on four lots. He stated the 600 square feet of unfinished space could not be 8 August 3, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11 (Co ILE NO: Z-772 finished without a violation of the PD -R. He stated there was no equitable way of removing the 600 square feet and if require would be difficult to enforce. Staff stated if this was a condition of approval the Commission would need to determine where the 600 square feet would be removed. The Commission questioned the roof pitch of the house under construction. Mr. Chisenhall stated the roof pitch was 10/12 or 12/12. There was a general discussion concerning the proposal and the previous commitments made. Commissioner Meyer stated the developers had pitched the development as in fill development which would be compatible to the existing neighborhood. He stated the previous approval was quiet contentious and the developers had ensure the Commission and the Board the development would fit the neighborhood. He stated he did not feel this was the case. Commissioner Williams questioned staff how they would ensure the 600 square feet would not be finished space by the future homeowner. Staff stated the address would be flagged but since a zoning clearance review was not required on renovation permits it would be difficult. There was a general discussion concerning the agreement for no loud music. Staff stated this would be difficult to enforce. Mr. Chisenhall stated his desire was to not place anything in the agreement that was subjective. He stated this was an item the neighborhood wanted in the agreement. He stated he was agreed this would be a difficult item to enforce. He stated the work hours would be posted on the site and would be attached to all future contracts. He stated the work hours would be closely monitored by the builder to ensure compliance. The Commission questioned how the agreement was reached. Mr. Chisenhall stated the original proposal was to adjust the lot lines between Lots 2 and 3 to allow the lot coverage to comply with the previous approval. Mr. Chisenhall stated after meeting with the neighborhood and the adjoining property owners it was determined there was a way to reach a compromise without creating an odd shaped lot. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no and 2 absent. E ITEM NO.:Z-7722-A NAME: Lagniappe Revised Short -form PD -R Lots 1 - 4 Lagniappe Addition LOCATION: located on the Northwest corner of Walnut and I Streets DEVELOPER: Lagniappe Addition, LLC 2106 Beechwood Little Rock, AR 72207 Bill Rector 300 South Izard Street Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.0 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -R ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential — four lots and two tracts PROPOSED ZONING: PD -R PROPOSED USE: Single-family Residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19,241 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 7, 2004, established Lagniappe Short -form PD -R. The applicant proposed the redevelopment of the site, previously platted as six lots, with a four lots and a two tract development through a PD -R. Two of the lots were approved as pipe -stem lots served by a 16 -foot paved drive and a 30 -foot access and utility easement extending from "I" Street near the intersection with Walnut Street. A fifteen foot building line was approved along "I" Street. The side yards within the development were proposed as six feet. A minimum square footage of heated and cooled space for the homes was 2,500 square feet. The maximum square footage of the homes along I Street was limited to 3,500 square feet and 4,500 square feet on the rear two homes. The maximum building height was limited to 32 -feet. A maximum building coverage of 28 percent without garages and 32 percent, including the garage, was approved. The applicant also indicated the construction materials would be compatible with existing exteriors in the area. The applicant indicated stone, brick, stucco, cobblestone, cypress or non -vinyl siding, antique cypress and pine beams would be added to the new homes. All windows and doors were wood and the roof constructed of asphalt shingles, wood shingles or clay roof tiles. Possible features of the new construction were antique gates, wrought iron railings, antique doors and windows and clay chimney caps. A. PROPOSALIREDUEST: The applicant is proposing an amendment to the previously approved PD -R for Lots 1 — 4 of Lagniappe Addition to allow the site to comply with previously imposed condition for lot coverage. The original PD -R included several restrictions including maximum square footage of houses (3500 square feet on Lots 1 and 2, 4,500 square feet on Lots 3 and 4), maximum roof height (32 feet) and a maximum lot coverage of 32 percent. According to the applicant, these restrictions were included in an effort to address neighborhood concerns, specifically those of the Hillcrest Resident's Association. Infrastructure work began in March of 2005 which included the addition of a fire hydrant to bring not only the proposed lots into compliance with the city fire code, but also existing homes in the neighborhood that were not in compliance. Water and sewer system improvements were constructed which included replacing the 50 year old water line between Ash and Walnut Streets with a new 3 inch line benefiting each homeowner's property on the block and new 6 inch sewer access installed for the houses west of 4400 I Street. The new 6 inch sewer access was done at the request of the City and in no way benefited the developers project. A private drive for access to Lots 3 and 4 was also completed. After completing the above mentioned infrastructure work, the developers submitted detailed plans, drawings and lot survey to the City of Little Rock for the issuance of a building permit. The permit was issued to Pursell Construction by the City of Little Rock on February 27, 2006 after which construction commenced on Lot 2. On May 18, 2006, at the request of the Hillcrest Resident's Association, a field audit was conducted by the City of Little Rock. It was determined that while the square footage, roof height, and other restrictions of the PD -R were in compliance, the percentage of lot coverage, which was built in accordance with plans submitted to and approved by the City, was in excess of the 32 percent allowed. According to the developers, this was unintentional and an oversight on the part of the applicant as well as the City. Currently, the construction is essentially in the "dry." A cease work order was issued by the City on May 23, 2006. The request also includes the placement of ornamental iron architectural features that do not extend into the side yard set back more that 36 inches, as typically allowed by City Code. The original PD -R included the approval of iron railings but did not specify the location of the railings or the extension of decks porches and patios within the required setback. No other revisions to the existing PD -R are being requested. The developers are requesting the typical ordinance standards for R-2, Single-family zoned property apply for issues not specifically addressed in the PD -R. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single family home currently under construction on Lot 2 with a building footprint of 3,127 square feet or 42.8 percent building coverage. The four lots and two tracts have been final platted. There are single-family homes located in the area and Alsop Park is located to the north. "I" Street has been widened to Master Street Plan standard abutting the proposed development. The area is characterized by single-family homes located on 50 -foot by 150 -foot lots; many of the homes sitting on two lots. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents located within 300 - feet of the site, who could be identified, were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. Erosion controls must be installed to protect downstream properties. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main on site constructed with easements in 2006. Any changes in planned subdivision may require relocation or extension of existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Mater: No objection. Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Maintain a 20 -foot driveway width. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. Lgunt Planning: No comment. LATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has requested a revision of a previously approved Planned Residential Development to modify the previously imposed conditions concerning total allowed building coverage. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: I Street is shown as a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: A Class III Bike Route is shown on Kavanaugh Boulevard and Beechwood Street. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal has these objective(s) relevant to this case: "Adopt a plan of action to stop the degradation, to reverse its course, and to recreate a neighborhood that is once again a pleasant place to work and live. This includes no net loss of residential units by demolition or conversion to other uses." Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 13, 2006) Larry and Martha Chisenhall were present representing the request. Staff presented the item indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff noted the proposal as submitted indicated the adjustment of a lot line to allow the proposed development to come into compliance with the maximum lot coverage allow per the approved PD -R. Staff stated there were other options being considered for the proposed request; one being increasing the lot coverage for Lot 2 and reducing the allowable building height for the remaining lots. Staff stated the developers, staff and the neighborhood were working to determine the best approach for resolution. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no outstanding issues associated with the request remaining from the July 13, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. Based on a meeting with the developers, the adjoining property owners and the Hillcrest Resident's Neighborhood Association, there were concessions made for modifications to the approved site plan and the approved PD -R. The approved PD -R allow for minimum setbacks, maximum square footages of the homes, maximum building coverage and maximum building heights. Based on a City audit of the site it was determined the structure currently under construction was in compliance with all previously imposed conditions with the exception of the total building coverage. The proposed revision would allow the coverage ratio for existing Lot 2 to be amended from 32 percent to 42 percent or as built, to reflect the current building footprint. The coverage ratio for Lot 1 will be increased from 32 percent to 38 percent and the 32 percent coverage ratio will remain for Lots 3 and 4. Lot 1 was approved with a six foot side yard setback along the west side. The developers are proposing Lot 1 to have a 10 foot set back, as opposed to the existing 6 foot set back, on the west side of Lot 1. With the increased space between Lot 1 and Lot 2, the dwelling on Lot 2 will be allowed to have a cantilevered deck on the east side of the dwelling not to exceed 45 inches in depth. In addition, the applicant is proposing the allowance of a decorative iron railing, not exceeding 36 inches in depth on the west side of the Lot 2 dwelling. No "unfinished" space will be included in dwellings built on Lots 1, 3 and 4. Unfinished space is defined as enclosed, floored space that in the future could be heated and cooled and has dimensions that meet the City's requirements for occupiable space. This restriction is not intended to prohibit a garage intended for parking vehicles, storage or workshop space opening off the garage, space to house mechanical equipment, or unfinished attic or eave space as long as such space is not heated and cooled. The original approval allowed for a six foot side yard setback along the common lot line of Lots 3 and 4. The revision would increase this setback to a 15 foot set back from the north line of Lot 3 and the south line of Lot 4. This setback does not include decks which will be allowed to extend into the setback %2 of the setback in this area. In addition, the same encroachment of decks applies to Lots 1 and 4. Deck space will not be considered in the calculation of any coverage ratio. The applicant has defined maximum building height. The maximum height for dwellings on Lots 1, 3 and 4 will be no more than 35 feet to the highest point on the roof ridge line from the average ground elevation within the foundation perimeter before any grading takes place. If there are to be multi-level roof ridge lines, the 35 foot measurement is to be taken from the average ground elevation within the perimeter of the foundation of that part of the structure supporting each roof ridge line. As required by City Ordinances, all construction materials will be confined to developer's property with no items stored in the public right-of-way between the sidewalk and the street. The working hours to be observed are pursuant to City code or ordinance which are as follows: Monday through Friday from 6 am to 6 pm, Saturday from 7 am to 6 pm and Sunday from 1 pm to 6 pm. Interior work is allowed Monday through Saturday as allowed for exterior work hours with the work hours increasing to an ending time to 10 pm. As a courtesy to the neighbors there is to be no loud music played by workers on the site. In summary the proposed amendments to the PD -R are as follow: • Lot coverage for Lot 2 is to be 42%, including garages, or as built • Lot coverage for Lot 1 is to be 38%, including garages • Lot coverage for Lots 3 and 4 is to be 32%, including garages • Lot 1 west side yard setback is 10 -feet • Lot 2 is permitted to have cantilevered deck on the east side not to exceed 45" in depth • Lot 2 permitted to have an architectural embellishment extending out not to exceed 36" in depth and enclosed with a decorative railing on the west side • Building height on Lot 2 to be as the structure is now built • Building height on Lots 1, 3 and 4 is to be no more than 35 feet to the highest point on the roof ridge line from the average ground elevation within the foundation perimeter before any grading takes place. If there are to be multi-level roof ridge lines, the 35 foot measurement is to be taken from the average ground elevation within the perimeter of the foundation of that part of the structure supporting each roof ridge line. ■ Construction materials are to be stored on the property • Working hours are to be Monday through Friday from 6 am to 6 pm, Saturday from 7 am to 6 pm and Sunday from 1 pm to 6 pm. Interior work is allowed Monday through Saturday as allowed for exterior work hours with the work hours increasing to an ending time to 10 pm. • No loud music is to be played by construction workers on the site • There is to be no unfinished space on Lots 1, 3 and 4. Unfinished space is defined as enclosed, floored space that in the future could be heated and cooled and has dimensions that meet the City's requirements for occupiable space. This restriction is not intended to prohibit a garage intended for parking vehicles, storage or workshop space opening off the garage, space to house mechanical equipment, or unfinished attic or eave space as long as such space is not heated and cooled. • The side yard setback for the northern property line of Lot 3 shall be 15 feet. ■ The side yard setback for the southern property line of Lot 4 shall be 15 feet. • Decks will be allowed into'/2 of the side yard setback for Lots 1, 3 and 4. • Deck space will not be considered in the calculation of any coverage ratio. Staff is supportive of the amendment to the PD -R for Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Lagniappe Addition as proposed by the developers and the neighbors. To staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 3, 2006) The applicant's were present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Mr. Larry Chisenhall addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the original request was to change the lot lines between Lots 2 and 3 increasing the lot area of Lot 2 to allow the 32 percent building coverage to be met. He stated after working with the neighborhood a compromise was reached to increase the allowable coverage and defining certain aspects of the development. One of which was building height. Ms. Carol Young addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the League of Women Voters did not support the request. She stated the developers knew the rules and chose to not abide by the rules. She stated if the developers violated the rules they should not be rewarded. She stated a decision should be made to send a message to the development community. Ms. Susan Borne addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated her home was located on Ash and I Streets just west of the site. She stated the original approval was worked on and agreed upon by the neighborhood the developers, the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors. She stated the developers did not honor the commitments made. She stated her main concerns were building height, setbacks and no net gain. She stated the unfinished space constructed in the existing home should be removed from the remaining homes yet to be constructed. She stated the developers had committed to construct homes which fit the character of the neighborhood along with providing architectural features consistent with the housing stock in the area. She stated the neighborhood had invested their lives in their homes and felt the neighborhood character should be maintained. Mr. Jim Vandenburg addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was distressed by what was being built. He stated the basic opinion was the developers had a disregard for the rules and regulations from the original agreement. He stated the 600 square feet of unfinished space looked like it could be finished with little effort. Mr. Scott Smith, President of the Hillcrest Resident's Association addressed the Commission. He stated the Resident's Association was not opposed to or in support of the request. He stated the height of the house in the rear put a spotlight on the structure. He stated with the agreement the height and setback concerns had been addressed. He stated the spacing between the houses had been increased and the lot coverage increased. He stated the basic concepts of the agreement were important to the fabric of the neighborhood. He stated the Resident's Association did not support the allowance of the 600 square feet of unfinished space. He stated the area had been floored which would allow this space to be finished with little effort by adding drywall, heat and air. He stated the area was clearly square footage which exceeded the allowable square footage contained in the home. He stated the Resident's Association was in a Grass Roots effort the define an overlay district or local ordinance district which would provide staff with technical information to help with future developments. He stated once staff was engaged they could clearly define floor area ratios and ridge heights which was included in the proposed agreement. He stated the Resident's Association supported the agreement but not the allowance of the 600 square feet of unfinished space and they felt this area should be removed from the remaining structures for a no net gain of square footage for the development. Mr. Chisenhall stated the all the imposed conditions had been met with the exception of the lot coverage. He stated the lot coverage was an oversight by both the builder and City staff. He stated the rear wall was constructed to hold up the back of the house. He stated once the area was defined it was floored for storage. He stated the area was never intended for livable space. He stated the house under construction was less than the allowable 3,500 square feet. He stated a total of 16,000 square feet was allowed through the approval contained on four lots. He stated the 600 square feet of unfinished space could not be finished without a violation of the PD -R. He stated there was no equitable way of removing the 600 square feet and if require would be difficult to enforce. Staff stated if this was a condition of approval the Commission would need to determine where the 600 square feet would be removed. The Commission questioned the roof pitch of the house under construction. Mr. Chisenhall stated the roof pitch was 10/12 or 12/12. There was a general discussion concerning the proposal and the previous commitments made. Commissioner Meyer stated the developers had pitched the development as in fill development which would be compatible to the existing neighborhood. He stated the previous approval was quiet contentious and the developers had ensure the Commission and the Board the development would fit the neighborhood. He stated he did not feel this was the case. Commissioner Williams questioned staff how they would ensure the 600 square feet would not be finished space by the future homeowner. Staff stated the address would be flagged but since a zoning clearance review was not required on renovation permits it would be difficult. There was a general discussion concerning the agreement for no loud music. Staff stated this would be difficult to enforce. Mr. Chisenhall stated his desire was to not place anything in the agreement that was subjective. He stated this was an item the neighborhood wanted in the agreement. He stated he was agreed this would be a difficult item to enforce. He stated the work hours would be posted on the site and would be attached to all future contracts. He stated the work hours would be closely monitored by the builder to ensure compliance. The Commission questioned how the agreement was reached. Mr. Chisenhall stated the original proposal was to adjust the lot lines between Lots 2 and 3 to allow the lot coverage to comply with the previous approval. Mr. Chisenhall stated after meeting with the neighborhood and the adjoining property owners it was determined there was a way to reach a compromise without creating an odd shaped lot. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no and 2 absent. ITEM NO.: 11. NAME: Lagniappe Revised Short -form PD -R LOCATION: located on the Northwest corner of Walnut and I Streets Plannina Staff Comments: Z -7722-A 1. Provide notification of abutting property owners of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. The notice must be mailed no later than July 19, 2006. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than July 28, 2006. (Completed 6/6/06) Variance/Waivers: None requested. Public Works Conditions: 1. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. Erosion controls must be installed to protect downstream properties. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Existing sewer main on site constructed with easements in 2006. Any changes in planned subdivision may require relocation or extension of existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Enter Center -Point Energy: SBC: Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Item # 1 I Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Maintain a 20 -foot driveway width. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATH: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route, Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has requested a revision of a previously approved Planned Residential Development to increase the lot area of Lot 2 and decrease the lot area of Lot 3 to allow compliance with a previously imposed condition concerning total allowed building coverage allowed per lot. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: I Street is shown as a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: A Class III Bike Route is shown on Kavanaugh Boulevard and Beechwood Street. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal has these objective(s) relevant to this case: "Adopt a plan of action to stop the degradation, to reverse its course, and to recreate a neighborhood that is once again a pleasant place to work and live. This includes no net loss of residential units by demolition or conversion to other uses." Landscape: No comment. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, July 19, 2006. Item # I I