Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8294 Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-8294 NAME: Oak Glen Short -form PD-R LOCATION: Located in the 1900 Block of Watt Street DEVELOPER: The Brown Company Remodelers Inc. 5119 West 33rd Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Garner Engineering 9300 Professor Drive Little Rock, AR 72227 AREA: 2.39 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONIN PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 11 R-2, Single-family Single-family residential Single-family residential VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED: FT. NEW STREET: 350 LF 1. A variance from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space. 2. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-232(d). A. PROPOSAUREQUESUAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT: The developer is proposing the development of a new single-family subdivision, which will ultimately include a property owners association as a legal entity of the subdivision. The Oak Glen Subdivision has been planned as an in -fill development to the City of Little Rock. The development will include a new public street to be named Oak Glen Lane. The subdivision will contain eleven (11) lots. The existing home will be maintained and platted on one of the eleven lots. The area surrounding the tract to be developed contains a variety of property types, including single-family residences, both detached and attached. The nearest detached single-family developments include Powell Addition, Harvey Addition and Sheraton Park Addition as well as some properties that are not part of any subdivision, including this parcel of property. The developer is in possession of title search records that date back to 1867 to confirm that this parcel is not part of any existing subdivision. Nearby attached single-family residences include the new Glen Abbey Court Addition, Chimney Cove Town homes, and Sheraton Court Condominiums. Non-residential property in the vicinity includes two churches, the Anthony School, Miss Selma's School, Mac Donald's, office buildings and other retail businesses. Oak Glen Subdivision will be built on 2.39 acres of ground previously part of a single property commonly know as 1910 Watt Street. The existing dwelling was built very early in the 1970's. A detached single family dwelling without a garage, the house is a one level frame structure including a sunken den with a vaulted ceiling and a gas fireplace. The home has between 1,700 and 1,750 square feet and is surrounded by very large oak trees. After completion of the subdivision, this home may be accessed from a new circular driveway off Watt Street and will also include a curb cut in the new street. To protect the large oak trees currently on this property, there is no plan at this time to add a garage to the existing home, which will be exempt from the requirement in the Bill of Assurance. There will be ten new lots developed for single-family residences in a development style often called patio or narrow lot homes. Four of the eleven lots in Oak Glen will meet the typical City's standard of 7,000 square foot minimum lot sizes. The five smallest lots will contain 5,486 square feet or be 50-foot wide by 109.72 feet deep. The style of the new homes will include narrow lot traditional, craftsman or country style single-family homes with a minimum of 1,400 square feet of heated and cooled space, but with the more common size estimate to be closer to 1,700 square feet. The subdivision will have restrictions stated in the Bill of Assurance and the homes will be built with a combination of materials, including low maintenance exteriors such as rock, brick or siding. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family home with a number of trees located on the site. The area is characterized primarily by single-family detached residences. There are developments in the area, which contain attached single-family units; the Glen Abbey Court Development, the Chimney Cove Town homes and Sheraton Court Condominiums. There are two schools in the area, the Anthony School and Ms. Selma's Montessori School. There are two (2) churches located to the south of the site. There are a large number of vacant lots located across Watt Street. The Anthony School has purchased these lots and removed the structures. The school has indicated they do not have immediate development plans for the recently acquired property. 2 FILE NO.: Z-8294 (Cant. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the proposed site, the Merriwether Neighborhood Association along with 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: 1. The City street section design detail requires 7" of base course and 3 inches of asphalt. 2. The street base course must compact to 100% modified standard proctor per Public Works Detail PW-22. 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. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 6. With the present design, residential waste cannot be collected from Lot 7. A proposed location that considers the City's collection vehicle capabilities should be provided. Residential waste from Lot 8 must be picked up on Watt Street. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. 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. 3 FILE NO.: Z-8294 Fire Department: Additional fire hydrant will be required at Watt Street and Oak Glen Lane. Contact Little Rock Fire Department for more information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Residential to allow the development of 11 single-family lots. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Watt Street is shown as a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets, which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as "Commercial Streets". These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Midtown Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing Goal states: "To maintain and enhance overall quality and value of housing." The addition of new single-family homes could be seen as enhancing the quality of the area. Landscape: 1. No comments on this detached single-family use. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 29, 2007) Ms. Carol Brown was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were a few outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff requested the applicant provide details of any proposed fencing located around the perimeter of the site or within the yard areas of the homes. Staff also questioned if accessory buildings or pools would be allowed within the development. Staff stated a note on the proposed site plan should be included regarding accessory buildings. Staff suggested the applicant move the structures closer to the street and increase the proposed rear yard -building 2 FILE NO.: Z-8294 (Cont. setback. Staff stated they had concerns with the 11-foot building setback as proposed. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated if the street was to be a public street the street must comply with typical minimum standards for design and construction. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the development of the site. Staff also stated as proposed Lot 8 could not be provided residential waste collection. Staff stated there were no landscaping comments concerning the proposed single-family residential development. 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: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing a number of the issues raised at the November 29, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The Bill of Assurance and an easement located on the final plat will allow for the trash receptacle for Lot 7 to be placed on Lot 6. Lot 8 will be provided garbage collection from Watt Street. The revised plan indicates the placement of fencing and accessory buildings per the R-2, Single-family Zoning District. The proposed square footages for the homes will be between 1,400 and 1,800 square feet for single level homes, and between 1,500 and 2,400 square feet for multi -level homes. The maximum building height of the proposed structures will be 35 feet. The proposed structures will be wood frame construction with low maintenance exteriors including fiber cement or vinyl siding, brick, real or simulated rock or brick or a combination of these materials. A subdivision identification sign is not proposed. The developer is requesting the ability to place a subdivision identification sign at the entrance on the south side of the street. The sign will not exceed 32 square feet in area and 6 feet in height as typically allowed in single-family zones. The sign will be placed on Tract A. Tract A will be owned and maintained by the Property Owners Association. The developer requests a variance from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space. The area south of Oak Glen Lane and east of Lot 1 will be designated as common open space as indicated on the site plan. As a single-family detached residential development, each lot will include open space in front, rear and side yards sufficient to meet the needs of the residents. There will be a minimum of 500 square feet of usable private open space per lot. Public parks including Reservoir Park and biking trails are available within the City as well in close proximity of the development. Fencing is proposed around the development along the exterior boundary lines not to exceed 8 feet in height and to be constructed of wood, brick, or a metal and masonry combination. Interior fences will be allowed by the future homeowners not to exceed 8 feet in height and of accepted fencing construction 5 FILE NO.: Z-8294 (Cont. materials as determined by the Property Owners Association Architectural Review Committee. Proposed Lots 8 and 9 are indicated as double frontage lots. The lots will be allowed access from Watt Street at existing and proposed curb cuts. The allowance of the lots as proposed will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance, Section 31-232(d). Accessory structures will be allowed including swimming pools, detached garages, and other outbuildings as determined by the POA architectural committee and the R-2 Single-family zoning district regulations for rear yard coverage and setbacks. The site plan includes a front building setback of 15-feet and a rear yard setback of 20-feet. Accessory structures and pools will be allowed within the rear yard area of the homes. The side yard setback proposed is five feet. Four of the eleven lots are proposed as typical per the R-2, Single-family Zoning District or 7,000 square feet. The five smallest lots will contain 5,486 square feet and are proposed 50 feet wide by 109.72 feet deep. The remaining two lots are proposed 76.01 feet and 79.57 feet wide and 81.84 feet deep with approximately 6,500 square feet. Staff is supportive of the development. The proposed density of 4.6 units per acre is near typical density guidelines for a single-family development. To staff's knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development with a single-family subdivision should have minimal impact on the area. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space and from Section 31-232(d) to allow double frontage lots. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 3, 2008) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space and from Section 31-232(d) to allow double frontage lots. Mr. Brown addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated the development was proposed as an in -fill development. He stated he and his wife had [01 FILE NO.: Z-8294 (Cont. bought the property, planned to develop the property and live in the development. He stated he would yield his time to the opposition and be available for rebuttal. Mr. Brent Williams addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his home was located just south of the development. He stated the lots in the area were developed with 10,000 to 15,0000 square feet and quite larger than the lots proposed by the developer. He stated his home was located approximately 10 feet from the property line and with the new construction the road would be located within feet of his rear wall and his back yard. He stated presently the site was an open field and with the proposal a street would be constructed and car headlights would shine into his kitchen and den area. He requested any fencing installed be a minimum of nine feet. Ms. Karen Suen addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located south of the development and she owned a second home in the area. She stated the developers were proposing a new road within a few feet of her existing and neighbors chain link fence. She stated Watt Street had been redesigned with the construction of Cantrell Road and the neighborhood now functioned and traffic flows were different. She stated the area had two schools which generated a great deal of traffic. She questioned the location of the proposed street and there being only one access to serve the residents. She stated the development would add to the existing congestion in the area. She stated she did not think an eight foot fence was high enough to block the car lights from the development. She questioned the development containing a pool and the location for the pool. The Commission questioned the square footage of the homes she owned. She stated the homes were proposed 1400 to 1700 square feet. The Commission noted the homes were proposed of a similar size. Ms. Suen stated the lot areas were not comparable. She stated her lot was much larger the lot proposed by the developer. Ms. Gene Smith addressed the Commission with concerns. She stated her home was west of the site on Biscayne Drive. She stated her concern was drainage. She stated the area was plagued with water problems which gushed when there was a rain. She stated she and her husband elected not to put up a fence because of the water. She stated she was very concerned with the development and the number of homes proposed. She stated she was told there would be five homes on the property similar to the development on Ohio Cove. Mr. Roy Wright addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his home was on Iowa Drive and he and his wife owned 1/3 of an acre. He stated the lots proposed for development were out of character with the neighborhood. He stated there were a few rent homes in the area but most were owner occupied. He stated the homes were proposed as tract homes which would lower property values in the area. He stated Anthony School owned a number of the homes across the street from the proposed development and his understanding was the area would be maintained with open space. He stated on a 5,300 square foot lot it would be difficult to put a house and car on the lot. 7 FILE NO.: Z-8294 (Cont.) Mr. Brown stated he did not want to be a bad neighbor but the development was proposed as an in -fill development. He stated the subdivision south of the development contained 1.9 acres and contained seven homes. He stated he was proposing to place nine homes in the same area which was not a significant increase in density. He stated the fence would address the car headlights. He stated the original proposal was to access the site across from Bonnie Bae but the City would not support the location since the streets would be off -set. He stated with the northern access this would limit the number of trees which would have to be removed to develop the road. Staff stated the street would not align therefore they could not support the street in the northern location. Commissioner Adcock questioned the alignment. Staff stated the existing home would remain which did not allow the streets to align. There was a general discussion by the Commission and staff concerning drainage in the area and the requirements of the developer. She stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the development of the property. The Commission questioned Mr. Brown if the engineering firm had designed the drainage plan. Mr. Brown stated the detailed plans had not been developed. He stated preliminary drainage calculations had been preformed and the development would adhere to the City ordinance requirements. There was a general discussion concerning streetlight and the City requirement for placement of streetlights. Staff stated streetlights were typically required. The Commission questioned if they could require the lights to meet the dark -sky requirements. Staff stated the City did not have an agreement with Entergy to meet dark -sky requirements and if the lights were public then no conditions could be placed on the lights. The Commission questioned Mr. Brown if he was planning streetlights. He stated he was not planning on placing lights within the subdivision. Staff questioned if the utilities would be underground or overhead. Mr. Brown stated underground. Staff requested Mr. Brown provide a stud -up to allow for future installation. The Commission stated the approval would include a condition that no streetlights would be installed in the subdivision. Staff noted should streetlights be desired in the future an amendment to the PD-R would be required to install the streetlights. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as amended eliminating streetlights from the development. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 3 noes and 1 absent. H; January 3, 2008 ITEM NO.: 15 NAME: Oak Glen Short -form PD-R LOCATION: Located in the 1900 Block of Watt Street DEVELOPER: The Brown Company Remodelers Inc. 5119 West 33d Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Garner Engineering 9300 Professor Drive Little Rock, AR 72227 AREA: 2.39 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 11 R-2, Single-family Single-family residential Single-family residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: FILE NO.: Z-8294 . NEW STREET: 350 LF 1. A variance from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space. 2. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-232(d). A. PROPOSAUREQUESUAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT: The developer is proposing the development of a new single-family subdivision, which will ultimately include a property owners association as a legal entity of the subdivision. The Oak Glen Subdivision has been planned as an in -fill development to the City of Little Rock. The development will include a new public street to be named Oak Glen Lane. The subdivision will contain eleven (11) lots. The existing home will be maintained and platted on one of the eleven lots. The area surrounding the tract to be developed contains a variety of January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 property types, including single-family residences, both detached and attached. The nearest detached single-family developments include Powell Addition, Harvey Addition and Sheraton Park Addition as well as some properties that are not part of any subdivision, including this parcel of property. The developer is in possession of title search records that date back to 1867 to confirm that this parcel is not part of any existing subdivision. Nearby attached single-family residences include the new Glen Abbey Court Addition, Chimney Cove Town homes, and Sheraton Court Condominiums. Non-residential property in the vicinity includes two churches, the Anthony School, Miss Selma's School, Mac Donald's, office buildings and other retail businesses. Oak Glen Subdivision will be built on 2.39 acres of ground previously part of a single property commonly know as 1910 Watt Street. The existing dwelling was built very early in the 1970's. A detached single family dwelling without a garage, the house is a one level frame structure including a sunken den with a vaulted ceiling and a gas fireplace. The home has between 1,700 and 1,750 square feet and is surrounded by very large oak trees. After completion of the subdivision, this home may be accessed from a new circular driveway off Watt Street and will also include a curb cut in the new street. To protect the large oak trees currently on this property, there is no plan at this time to add a garage to the existing home, which will be exempt from the requirement in the Bill of Assurance. There will be ten new lots developed for single-family residences in a development style often called patio or narrow lot homes. Four of the eleven lots in Oak Glen will meet the typical City's standard of 7,000 square foot minimum lot sizes. The five smallest lots will contain 5,486 square feet or be 50-foot wide by 109.72 feet deep. The style of the new homes will include narrow lot traditional, craftsman or country style single-family homes with a minimum of 1,400 square feet of heated and cooled space, but with the more common size estimate to be closer to 1,700 square feet. The subdivision will have restrictions stated in the Bill of Assurance and the homes will be built with a combination of materials, including low maintenance exteriors such as rock, brick or siding. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family home with a number of trees located on the site. The area is characterized primarily by single-family detached residences. There are developments in the area, which contain attached single-family units; the Glen Abbey Court Development, the Chimney Cove Town homes and Sheraton Court Condominiums. There are two schools in the area, the Anthony School and Ms. Selma's Montessori School. There are two (2) churches located to the south of the site. There are a large number of vacant lots located across Watt Street. The Anthony School has purchased these lots and removed the structures. The school has indicated they do not have immediate development plans for the recently acquired property. 2 January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8294 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the proposed site, the Merriwether Neighborhood Association along with 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: 1. The City street section design detail requires 7" of base course and 3 inches of asphalt. 2. The street base course must compact to 100% modified standard proctor per Public Works Detail PW-22. 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. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 6. With the present design, residential waste cannot be collected from Lot 7. A proposed location that considers the City's collection vehicle capabilities should be provided. Residential waste from Lot 8 must be picked up on Watt Street. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Enerav: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information 3 January3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 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: Additional fire hydrant will be required at Watt Street and Oak Glen Lane. Contact Little Rock Fire Department for more information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Residential to allow the development of 11 single-family lots. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Watt Street is shown as a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets, which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as "Commercial Streets". These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicvcle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Midtown Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing Goal states: "To maintain and enhance overall quality and value of housing." The addition of new single-family homes could be seen as enhancing the quality of the area. Landscape: 1. No comments on this detached single-family use. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 29, 2007) Ms. Carol Brown was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were a few outstanding 0 January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff requested the applicant provide details of any proposed fencing located around the perimeter of the site or within the yard areas of the homes. Staff also questioned if accessory buildings or pools would be allowed within the development. Staff stated a note on the proposed site plan should be included regarding accessory buildings. Staff suggested the applicant move the structures closer to the street and increase the proposed rear yard -building setback. Staff stated they had concerns with the 11-foot building setback as proposed. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated if the street was to be a public street the street must comply with typical minimum standards for design and construction. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the development of the site. Staff also stated as proposed Lot 8 could not be provided residential waste collection. Staff stated there were no landscaping comments concerning the proposed single-family residential development. 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: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing a number of the issues raised at the November 29, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The Bill of Assurance and an easement located on the final plat will allow for the trash receptacle for Lot 7 to be placed on Lot 6. Lot 8 will be provided garbage collection from Watt Street. The revised plan indicates the placement of fencing and accessory buildings per the R-2, Single-family Zoning District. The proposed square footages for the homes will be between 1,400 and 1,800 square feet for single level homes, and between 1,500 and 2,400 square feet for multi -level homes. The maximum building height of the proposed structures will be 35 feet. The proposed structures will be wood frame construction with low maintenance exteriors including fiber cement or vinyl siding, brick, real or simulated rock or brick or a combination of these materials. A subdivision identification sign is not proposed. The developer is requesting the ability to place a subdivision identification sign at the entrance on the south side of the street. The sign will not exceed 32 square feet in area and 6 feet in height as typically allowed in single-family zones. The sign will be placed on Tract A. Tract A will be owned and maintained by the Property Owners Association. The developer requests a variance from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space. The area south of Oak Glen Lane 5 January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 and east of Lot 1 will be designated as common open space as indicated on the site plan. As a single-family detached residential development, each lot will include open space in front, rear and side yards sufficient to meet the needs of the residents. There will be a minimum of 500 square feet of usable private open space per lot. Public parks including Reservoir Park and biking trails are available within the City as well in close proximity of the development. Fencing is proposed around the development along the exterior boundary lines not to exceed 8 feet in height and to be constructed of wood, brick, or a metal and masonry combination. Interior fences will be allowed by the future homeowners not to exceed 8 feet in height and of accepted fencing construction materials as determined by the Property Owners Association Architectural Review Committee. Proposed Lots 8 and 9 are indicated as double frontage lots. The lots will be allowed access from Watt Street at existing and proposed curb cuts. The allowance of the lots as proposed will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance, Section 31-232(d). Accessory structures will be allowed including swimming pools, detached garages, and other outbuildings as determined by the POA architectural committee and the R-2 Single-family zoning district regulations for rear yard coverage and setbacks. The site plan includes a front building setback of 15-feet and a rear yard setback of 20-feet. Accessory structures and pools will be allowed within the rear yard area of the homes. The side yard setback proposed is five feet. Four of the eleven lots are proposed as typical per the R-2, Single-family Zoning District or 7,000 square feet. The five smallest lots will contain 5,486 square feet and are proposed 50 feet wide by 109.72 feet deep. The remaining two lots are proposed 76.01 feet and 79.57 feet wide and 81.84 feet deep with approximately 6,500 square feet. Staff is supportive of the development. The proposed density of 4.6 units per acre is near typical density guidelines for a single-family development. To staffs knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development with a single-family subdivision should have minimal impact on the area. 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space and from Section 31-232(d) to allow double frontage lots. no January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 3, 2008) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from Section 36-460(h)(1), the minimum requirement for common usable open space and from Section 31-232(d) to allow double frontage lots. Mr. Brown addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated the development was proposed as an in -fill development. He stated he and his wife had bought the property, planned to develop the property and live in the development. He stated he would yield his time to the opposition and be available for rebuttal. Mr. Brent Williams addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his home was located just south of the development. He stated the lots in the area were developed with 10,000 to 15,0000 square feet and quite larger than the lots proposed by the developer. He stated his home was located approximately 10 feet from the property line and with the new construction the road would be located within feet of his rear wall and his back yard. He stated presently the site was an open field and with the proposal a street would be constructed and car headlights would shine into his kitchen and den area. He requested any fencing installed be a minimum of nine feet. Ms. Karen Suen addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located south of the development and she owned a second home in the area. She stated the developers were proposing a new road within a few feet of her existing and neighbors chain link fence. She stated Watt Street had been redesigned with the construction of Cantrell Road and the neighborhood now functioned and traffic flows were different. She stated the area had two schools which generated a great deal of traffic. She questioned the location of the proposed street and there being only one access to serve the residents. She stated the development would add to the existing congestion in the area. She stated she did not think an eight foot fence was high enough to block the car lights from the development. She questioned the development containing a pool and the location for the pool. The Commission questioned the square footage of the homes she owned. She stated the homes were proposed 1400 to 1700 square feet. The Commission noted the homes were proposed of a similar size. Ms. Suen stated the lot areas were not comparable. She stated her lot was much larger the lot proposed by the developer. 7 January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISIO ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 Ms. Gene Smith addressed the Commission with concerns. She stated her home was west of the site on Biscayne Drive. She stated her concern was drainage. She stated the area was plagued with water problems which gushed when there was a rain. She stated she and her husband elected not to put up a fence because of the water. She stated she was very concerned with the development and the number of homes proposed. She stated she was told there would be five homes on the property similar to the development on Ohio Cove. Mr. Roy Wright addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his home was on Iowa Drive and he and his wife owned 1/3 of an acre. He stated the lots proposed for development were out of character with the neighborhood. He stated there were a few rent homes in the area but most were owner occupied. He stated the homes were proposed as tract homes which would lower property values in the area. He stated Anthony School owned a number of the homes across the street from the proposed development and his understanding was the area would be maintained with open space. He stated on a 5,300 square foot lot it would be difficult to put a house and car on the lot. Mr. Brown stated he did not want to be a bad neighbor but the development was proposed as an in -fill development. He stated the subdivision south of the development contained 1.9 acres and contained seven homes. He stated he was proposing to place nine homes in the same area which was not a significant increase in density. He stated the fence would address the car headlights. He stated the original proposal was to access the site across from Bonnie Bae but the City would not support the location since the streets would be off -set. He stated with the northern access this would limit the number of trees which would have to be removed to develop the road. Staff stated the street would not align therefore they could not support the street in the northern location. Commissioner Adcock questioned the alignment. Staff stated the existing home would remain which did not allow the streets to align. There was a general discussion by the Commission and staff concerning drainage in the area and the requirements of the developer. She stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the development of the property. The Commission questioned Mr. Brown if the engineering firm had designed the drainage plan. Mr. Brown stated the detailed plans had not been developed. He stated preliminary drainage calculations had been preformed and the development would adhere to the City ordinance requirements. There was a general discussion concerning streetlight and the City requirement for placement of streetlights. Staff stated streetlights were typically required. The Commission questioned if they could require the lights to meet the dark -sky IQ January 3, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8294 requirements. Staff stated the City did not have an agreement with Entergy to meet dark -sky requirements and if the lights were public then no conditions could be placed on the lights. The Commission questioned Mr. Brown if he was planning streetlights. He stated he was not planning on placing lights within the subdivision. Staff questioned if the utilities would be underground or overhead. Mr. Brown stated underground. Staff requested Mr. Brown provide a stud -up to allow for future installation. The Commission stated the approval would include a condition that no streetlights would be installed in the subdivision. Staff noted should streetlights be desired in the future an amendment to the PD-R would be required to install the streetlights. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as amended eliminating streetlights from the development. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 3 noes and 1 absent. �7 ITEM NO.: 15. Z-8294 NAME: Oak Glen Short -form PD-R LOCATION: located in the 1900 Block of Watt Street Planning Staff Comments: 1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. The notice must be mailed no later than December 19, 2007. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than December 28, 2007. 2. Provide the percentage of open space proposed to serve the development. The PZD ordinance typically requires a minimum of ten to fifteen percent be set aside as common usable open space. Identify the private open space for each of the proposed units. Single-family, duplex and zero lot line developments are to have a minimum of 500 square feet of usable private open space per unit. 3. The site plan indicates a maximum buildable area with the front, rear and side yard setbacks indicated. The development is proposed containing 2.39 acres and 11 single-family residential lots resulting in a density of 4.6 units per acre. The ordinance typically sets residential guidelines for development of single-family at 4 units per acre and zero lot line/patio home development at 4 — 6 units per acre. 4. Is any fencing proposed within the development? If so provide the location of the proposed fencing including a note indicating the construction materials along with the total height. 5. Provide the proposed square footages of the homes. Provide the proposed construction materials. Provide the maximum building height of the proposed structures. 6. Will there be a subdivision identification sign located at the entrance to the proposed subdivision? Provide the location along with the total height and area. Single-family is typically allowed a maximum sign area of thirty-two square feet and a maximum sign height of six feet. 7. Are interior fences proposed with the new construction or by the future homeowners? Include a note on the site plan including the total height and construction material to allow fencing to occur. 8. Are accessory structures allowed, including outbuildings and swimming pools as a part of the Bill of Assurance. If these are desired include a note on the proposed site plan to allow accessory structures per the R-2, Single-family zoning district. 9. Will the area located south of Oak Glen Lane be a part of Lot 1? If not who will be responsible for maintaining this area. 10. Lots 8 and 9 are indicated as double frontage lots. Will access be permitted from Watt Street? If not indicate a no right of vehicular access easement (10-feet) along the lot frontages. 11. Staff would suggest the site plan be revised reducing the front building line to 15-feet and increasing the rear building line to 20-feet. The development could add Item # 15. language to allow accessory structures and pools within the rear yard area of the site plan. Variance/Waivers: None requested. Public Works Conditions: 1. The City street section design detail requires 7" of base course and 3 inches of asphalt. 2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right- of-way prior to occupancy. 3. 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. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. With the present design, residential waste cannot be collected from Lot 7. A proposed location that considers the City's collection vehicle capabilities should be provided. Residential waste from Lot 8 must be picked up on Watt Street. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. 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: Additional fire hydrant will be required at Watt Street and Oak Glen Lane. Contact Little Rock Fire Department for more information. County -Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Residential to allow the development of 11 single family lots. Item # 15. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Watt Street is shown as a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as "Commercial Streets". These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Nei hborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Midtown Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing Goal states: "To maintain and enhance overall quality and value of housing." The addition of new single family homes could be seen as enhancing the quality of the area. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's minimum landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. No comments on this detached single family use. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat/plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, December 5, 2007. Item # 15.