Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8471 Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-8471 NAME: Young Short -form PD-R LOCATION: 712 Ash Street DEVELOPER: Carol Young 712 Ash Street Little Rock, AR 72205 SURVEYOR: Brooks Surveying, Inc. 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.16 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-5, Urban Residential District ALLOWED USES: High -density residential uses at a density of thirty-six units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Single-family — Rear Yard Garage - Variation from the Hillcrest Design Overlay District to allow an increased percentage of rear yard lot coverage VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the establishment of a PD-R to allow the extension of a garage roof to cover a two -car parking pad located in the rear of the existing home. The pad measures 21.8 feet by 23 feet. The applicant intends to demolish the existing garage located off the alley at 712 Ash Street and construct a new two (2) door, side -entry garage, using the same footprint, 20'2" x 21'8". The structure will be constructed .with a five foot setback from the alley. The entire roof will result in approximately 950 square feet of covered space. FILE NO.: Z-8471 [Cont. The new structure will be constructed with a raised roof pitch, using three tab singles and the sheath of the garage will be with horizontal siding, much more in keeping with the residence on the property. The request is for a variation from Section 36-434.14(C). According to the Hillcrest Design Overlay within the rear -lot twenty-five foot setback from the rear property line accessory building coverage shall be no more than forty (40) percent of the area in that section. The new garage structure is proposed containing approximately 950 square feet. Without the approval of a variation, the Overlay would allow a structure containing approximately 500 square feet. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The home is located mid -block on Ash Street with a walk extending to the house from Ash Street. This area of Hillcrest contains a number of single-family, duplex and multi -family structures. The alley located behind the residences is a functioning alley with a number of the residences on Ash and Beachwood Streets parking off the alley. The rear yard currently contains a garage structure and a two car parking pad. The property to the north also contains an accessory structure located off the alley as does a property further north and one to the south. Across the alley is a property zoned PD-R which was approved to allow the construction of a garage apartment. South of these properties are the non-residential uses located along Kavanaugh Boulevard. At the end of the alley is a restaurant and an auto repair shop. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Enter : No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. 2 FILE NO.: Z-8471 (Cont. F G. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is -"not located on Route #1 — Pulaski Heights Route Kavanaugh Boulevard. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: a dedicated CATA Bus Route. CATA Bus is located to the south of the site along Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential High Density for this property. The request does not change the use of the property, no change to the Land Use Plan is proposed. Master Street Plan: Ash Street is 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 planned along Kavanaugh Boulevard. 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. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan. Their Housing Goal states: "Pursue establishing an overlay district that protects the eclectic architectural character of the Hillcrest Neighborhood without imposing unreasonable restrictions on property owners' rights to remodel of otherwise alter their property." This PDR application is a direct result of the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. Landscape: No comment. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 2, 2009) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. The Commissioners encouraged the applicant to contact the Hillcrest Residents Association and inform the association of her request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. 3 FILE NO.: Z-8471 (Cont. H. ANALYSIS: There were no issues raised at the July 2, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting in need of addressing with a revision to the site plan. The request is a rezoning and the establishment of a PD-R to allow the extension of a garage roof to cover a two -car parking pad located in the rear of this existing home. The site plan indicates the existing garage located off the alley will be demolished and the new construction involves a new two (2) door, side -entry garage, using the same footprint, 20'2" x 21'8" and extending the roof of the new garage over an existing two car parking pad located with a five foot setback from the alley. The existing garage is constructed of sheet plywood and a flat roof. The new structure will be constructed with a raised roof pitch, using three tab singles and the sheath of the garage will be with horizontal siding, much more in keeping with the residence on the property. The site is located within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District which addresses a number of issues including rear yard lot coverage. Section 36-434.14(C) states within the rear -lot twenty-five foot setback from the rear property line accessory building coverage shall be no more than forty (40) percent of the area in that section. The structure is located approximately five (5) feet from the alley. As currently constructed the structure contains approximately 500 square feet and the two car parking pad located to the south of the garage is uncovered. The new structure is proposed containing approximately 942 square feet and allows replacement of the existing garage and covering the two car parking pad. Based on the structure as proposed the area of rear yard coverage is 69 percent. As stated the Hillcrest Design Overlay District allows a maximum rear yard coverage of 40 percent. If for any reason the DOD cannot be adhered to the applicant must seek a rezoning to a planned zoning district with the intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay standards. Staff is supportive of the request. Although the structure is proposed in excess of the typical overlay standard the southern portion of the structure will remain open allowing for the visual effect of breaking the massing. There are similar situations located in the area with garages and garage apartments located off the alleys. Staff does not feel the garage as proposed will impact the site or the area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 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. El FILE NO.: Z-8471 (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated July 15, 2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the September 3, 3009, public hearing to allow additional time to meet with the Hillcrest Residents Association. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change to this application request since the previous staff write-up. Staff has received a letter of support from the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association. Staff continues to support the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no 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. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. 5 September 3, 2009 ITEM NO.: J NAME: Young Short -form PD-R LOCATION: 712 Ash Street DEVELOPER: Carol Young 712 Ash Street Little Rock, AR 72205 SURVEYOR Brooks Surveying, Inc. 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 FILE NO.: Z-8471 AREA: 0.16 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-5, Urban Residential District ALLOWED USES: High -density residential uses at a density of thirty-six units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Single-family — Rear Yard Garage - Variation from the Hillcrest Design Overlay District to allow an increased percentage of rear yard lot coverage VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED- None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the establishment of a PD-R to allow the extension of a garage roof to cover a two -car parking pad located in the rear of the existing home. The pad measures 21.8 feet by 23 feet. The applicant intends to demolish the existing garage located off the alley at 712 Ash Street and construct a new two (2) door, side -entry garage,- using the same footprint, 20'2" x 21'8". The structure will be constructed with a five foot setback from the alley. The entire roof will result in approximately 950 square feet of covered space. September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8471 The new structure will be constructed with a raised roof pitch, using three tab singles and the sheath of the garage will be with horizontal siding, much more in keeping with the residence on the property. The request is for a variation from Section 36-434.14(C). According to the Hillcrest Design Overlay within the rear -lot twenty-five foot setback from the rear property line accessory building coverage shall be no more than forty (40) percent of the area in that section. The new garage structure is proposed containing approximately 950 square feet. Without the approval of a variation, the Overlay would allow a structure containing approximately 500 square feet. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The home is located mid -block on Ash Street with a walk extending to the house from Ash Street. This area of Hillcrest contains a number of single-family, duplex and multi -family structures. The alley located behind the residences is a functioning alley with a number of the residences on Ash and Beachwood Streets parking off the alley. The rear yard currently contains a garage structure and a two car parking pad. The property to the north also contains an accessory structure located off the alley as does a property further north and one to the south. Across the alley is a property zoned PD-R which was approved to allow the construction of a garage apartment. South of these properties are the non-residential uses located along Kavanaugh Boulevard. At the end of the alley is a restaurant and an auto repair shop. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: BLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. 2 September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Ener : No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. FILE NO.: Z-8471 Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. CATA Bus Route #1 — Pulaski Heights Route is located to the south of the site along Kavanaugh Boulevard. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential High Density for this property. The request does not change the use of the property, no change to the Land Use Plan is proposed. Master Street Plan: Ash Street is 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 planned along Kavanaugh Boulevard. 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. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan. Their Housing Goal states: "Pursue establishing an overlay district that protects the eclectic architectural character of the Hillcrest Neighborhood without imposing unreasonable restrictions on property owners' rights to remodel of otherwise alter their property." This PDR application is a direct result of the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. Landscape: No comment. 3 September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8471 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 2, 2009) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. The Commissioners encouraged the applicant to contact the Hillcrest Residents Association and inform the association of her request. 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 issues raised at the July 2, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting in need of addressing with a revision to the site plan. The request is a rezoning and the establishment of a PD-R to allow the extension of a garage roof to cover a two -car parking pad located in the rear of this existing home. The site plan indicates the existing garage located off the alley will be demolished and the new construction involves a new two (2) door, side -entry garage, using the same footprint, 20'2" x 21'8" and extending the roof of the new garage over an existing two car parking pad located with a five foot setback from the alley. The existing garage is constructed of sheet plywood and a flat roof. The new structure will be constructed with a raised roof pitch, using three tab singles and the sheath of the garage will be with horizontal siding, much more in keeping with the residence on the property. The site is located within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District which addresses a number of issues including rear yard lot coverage. Section 36-434.14(C) states within the rear -lot twenty-five foot setback from the rear property line accessory building coverage shall be no more than forty (40) percent of the area in that section. The structure is located approximately five (5) feet from the alley. As currently constructed the structure contains approximately 500 square feet and the two car parking pad located to the south of the garage is uncovered. The new structure is proposed containing approximately 942 square feet and allows replacement of the existing garage and covering the two car parking pad. Based on the structure as proposed the area of rear yard coverage is 69 percent. As stated the Hillcrest Design Overlay District allows a maximum rear yard coverage of 40 percent. If for any reason the DOD cannot be adhered to the applicant must seek a rezoning to a planned zoning district with the intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay standards. Staff is supportive of the request. Although the structure is proposed in excess of the typical overlay standard the southern portion of the structure will remain open M September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8471 allowing for the visual effect of breaking the massing. There are similar situations located in the area with garages and garage apartments located off the alleys. Staff does not feel the garage as proposed will impact the site or the area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - 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. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated July 15, 2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the September 3, 3009, public hearing to allow additional time to meet with the Hillcrest Residents Association. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change to this application request since the previous staff write-up. Staff has received a letter of support from the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association. Staff continues to support the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: _ (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no 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. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. 5 September 3, 2009 ITEM NO.: K NAME: LOCATION: APPLICANT FILE NO.: LA-0027 Valley Heights Land Alteration Retaining Wall Variance Request 6900 Cantrell Road Valley Heights Apartments II Limited Partnership APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: David Henry CURRENT ZONING: R5 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: An appeal request of the corrective action of a Notice of Violation dated March 3, 2009 requiring removal of the wall or some less minor modifications to comply with the Land Alteration Regulations. A variance request to exceed the maximum retaining wall height, maximum slope, and install alternative landscaping as found in Sec. 29-190 of the Land Alteration Regulations. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an appeal of the corrective action of a Notice of Violation dated March 3, 2009 requiring removal of the wall or some less minor modifications to comply with the Land Alteration Regulations. The applicant is also requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to exceed the maximum retaining wall height, maximum slope, and install alternative landscaping as found in Sec. 29-190. The retaining wall is located on the southwest corner of Valley Heights Apartments at 6900 Cantrell Road. The retaining wall was installed during the construction of a new 3 story apartment building. The certificate of occupancy is being held until the issue is resolved to the City's satisfaction. The retaining wall is out of compliance with the Land Alteration Regulations in the following way: 1. The wall is a total of 33 feet tall. The maximum allowable height of the entire terraced wall is 30 feet with 1 to 2 terraces. Each wall cannot exceed 15 feet in height; 2. The horizontal terrace bench of the wall is about 4.0 feet wide. The minimum allowable width of the horizontal terrace bench is 10 feet for two (2) 15 foot retaining walls; 3. Trees are not planted on the horizontal terrace bench of the wall. The Land Alteration Regulations require 2 rows of evergreen trees to be planted 5 feet between the rows and each tree staggered 15 feet apart. September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K (Cont. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: FILE NO.: LA-0027 The subject property is located on the north side of Cantrell Road just west of N. Hughes Street. The subject property is zoned R5. R2 zoned properties are located to the north. C3 zoned properties are located to the west. One of those properties is the Blackmon Chiropractic Clinic. To the south is Cantrell Road. Further to the south across Cantrell Road are C3 zoned properties such as Stein Mart, restaurants, and others. To the east are condominiums and apartments zoned R5. The retaining wall is only visible from within the property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Certified mail notices were sent by the applicant to neighboring properties as per ordinance requirements. As of this writing, staff has received various communications from Dr. Chris Blackmon, an adjacent property owner, stating concerns pertaining to the stability of the retaining wall. A phone call was also received from Gary Simmons of the Kingwood Neighborhood Association requesting a general explanation of the violations and other pertinent information. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Retaining wall design plans prepared by a registered professional engineer have been provided to staff for review. Provide a letter prepared by a registered professional engineer certifying the retaining wall as constructed, not as designed, meets or exceeds necessary safety and stability factors for walls of this type. 2. The design drawings submitted to civil for review does not appear to match what was constructed at the site. Submit in written and electronic form an as -built plan showing: a. the top and toe of the wall; b. edge of excavation; c. edge of clearing; d. corresponding stationing as shown on the design plans; and e. the dimensions of the highest course of the geogrid mats for all walls in the southwest portion of the property. E. LANDSCAPE COMMENTS: 1. The site is more than 2 acres in size; therefore, any/all landscape plans should be stamped by a Registered Landscape Architect from the State of Arkansas. 2 September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K (Cont. FILE NO.: LA-0027 2. Any/all newly planted landscaping must have an automatic irrigation system installed. 3. Due to the abnormality of the size and structure of the wall landscaping should included evergreen vegetation growing up the retaining walls, growing down the retaining walls, and include trees and/or large shrubs on the - benches of the walls; within the limits of the structural capacity. (to be determined by your landscape architect). 4. Any/all disturbed areas about the wall or below the wall are to be re-established with vegetation to discourage run-off and/or erosion of the area(s). F. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (April 8, 2009) Bruce Tidwell of Friday, Eldredge, and Clark and John Johnson of Henry Construction were present representing the applicant. Staff stated the comments as written above. Mr. Tidwell asked questions pertaining to the specifics of the certification and the as -built drawing. Jeff Yates told the applicant's representatives to meet with staff and work thru the comments. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. G. ANALYSIS: About half of the approximately 733 linear feet of retaining wall is out of compliance with the Land Alteration Regulation in at least two of the items listed below. The retaining wall is only visible from within the property. At the closest point, the newly constructed apartment building is located 6 inches from the retaining wall. Issues have been raised about the stability of the retaining walls. It is believed the anchoring geogrid mats were not installed at the lengths specified in the design plans. The retaining walls are out of compliance with the Land Alteration Regulations in the following ways: 1. The walls are a total of 33 feet tall. The maximum allowable height of the entire terraced wall is 30 feet with 1 to 2 terraces. Each wall cannot exceed 15 feet in height; 2. The horizontal terrace bench of the wall is about 4.0 feet wide. The minimum allowable width of the horizontal terrace bench is 10 feet for two (2) 15 foot retaining wall; 3 September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K Cont. FILE NO.: LA-0027 3. Trees are not planted on the horizontal terrace bench of the wall. The Land Alteration Regulations require 2 rows of evergreen trees to be planted 5 feet between the rows and each tree staggered 15 feet apart. The certificate of occupancy is being held until the noncompliance issues are resolved to the City's satisfaction. During staff's building permit review process, the retaining walls shown on the grading and drainage plan was reviewed and found to be in conformance with the Land Alteration Regulations. However, the structural design drawings were not submitted to staff as required by code. At some point, the wall design was then modified from the original configuration, however, plans were not submitted to staff for review. Further along in the construction process, the design plans were again revised and again not submitted to staff for review. In summary, a total of three (3) design plans were prepared for the walls and only the original set of plans were submitted to staff for review prior to construction. Staff has received an as -built drawing of the wall prepared by a licensed surveyor. The wall shows to be constructed about 2.5 feet shorter than shown on the design plans. The lower wall is about 14.5 feet tall with a horizontal terrace of about 4 feet wide. The upper wall above the horizontal terrace is about 18.67 ft tall for a length of about 35 feet. The width requirement of the horizontal terrace is required for aesthetic purposes to provide a flat area for planting evergreen trees. It is not for structural purposes. The as -built drawing also showed the anchoring geogrid mats are shorter than shown on the design plans. Based on the as -built drawing and visual inspection, the registered engineer who designed the wall submitted to staff a certification of the stability of the wall. He stated, "The overall upper wall stability meets or exceeds the factors of safety used in the original design." He also stated, "The wall should continue to perform in accordance with the standards or practice adequately over the long term." With the certification letter, the engineer also provided engineering analysis assuming the existing conditions of the wall. The analysis shows the strengths of the wall are twice the required factor of safety design strengths for sliding and overturning. The wall also exceeds 10 times the required factor of safety design strength for bearing capacity. The engineer observed visually the retaining wall and did not observe any wall face movement which he says would be indicative of improper geogrid placement. CI September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0027 The retaining wall is only visible from within the property. At the time of writing, staff has not received a landscape plan but has met with a registered landscape architect and agreed on the landscaping to be provided. Staff will receive the landscape plan prior to the hearing for confirmation of the provided landscaping. Currently, the owner of the neighboring property to the southwest (Blackmon Chiropractic Clinic) and the applicant are in litigation pertaining to the retaining wall because during construction of the wall, it has been alleged that excavation occurred on the neighboring property and portions of the wall's anchoring geogrid mats are installed on Dr. Blackmon's property. The trespassing on the neighboring property is a civil matter which the City is not a party to. As a result of the lawsuit, if the anchoring geogrid mats are required to be removed the wall will have to be modified or maybe rebuilt. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff has spent considerable time reviewing this application. Staff has several concerns about this variance. The original building permit plans provided to the City for approval were modified two (2) separate time after the building permit was issued and those changes were never resubmitted to staff for review. The original building permit plans complied with the Land Alteration Regulations. The two (2) revised plans did not. Staff is concerned that the engineers and contractor designed and built this wall not in conformance with the approved building permit plans. It was known the wall was not in conformance with Land Alteration Regulations but still did not modify the plans to comply with the regulations; did not bring the noncompliance issue to the attention of staff; and proceeded to finish the wall and construct the apartment building just inches away. Staff has concerns that the as -built drawing does not comply with any of the three (3) plans prepared by the engineer. Staff is concerned about the lack of documentation by the contractor during the construction process for such a huge liability like a large retaining wall built so close to an apartment building. The documentation of construction of retaining wall is an industry standard. Staff is concerned about the lack of planning by the engineer and the contractor in designing and building a wall with an apparent encroachment onto the adjacent property. Staff has concerns about the stability of the wall. While the engineer has provided an as -built certification that the wall stability exceeds all factors of safety, his opinion could only be formed by looking at portions of the wall system. 5 September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA In the engineer's words, it would be impossible to look at the entire system without removal of the wall. If the wall slides, overturns or collapses, human safety and property damage are at risk. Staff recommends denial of the variance request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION- (APRIL 30, 2009) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated April 30, 2009, requesting deferral of the item to the May 28, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission's By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to waive the Commission's By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 28, 2009) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter on May 13, 2009 requesting the item be deferred to the June 25, 2009 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the June 25, 2009 Agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The application was deferred. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 25, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the August 6, 2009 agenda to allow additional time to study the wall issue. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to August 6, 2009 by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent. A September 3, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K Cont.) J. STAFF UPDATE: FILE NO.: LA-0027 (JULY 28, 2009) Since the original agenda date of this item on April 30, 2009, litigation pertaining to the retaining wall between Valley Heights Apartments and Blackmon Chiropractic Clinic has been resolved. The property where the geogrid mats encroached upon the Blackmon property has been acquired by Valley Heights Apartments and is no longer subject to the potential to be removed. A letter dated July 6, 2009 from James D. Rankin III, Attorney for the Blackmons, was received by staff stating all disputes have been resolved with Valley Heights Apartments and the Blackmons are withdrawing all previous objections to the Valley Heights Apartments' retaining wall. The letter continued and stated the Blackmons are now in support of the Planning Commission granting the requested variance and the certificate of occupancy. No other telephone calls or letters have been received objecting to the variance request for the retaining wall. Staff currently has contracted with Terracon Consulting Engineers & Scientists to conduct a technical review of the file documents pertaining to stability of the retaining wall. This review will examine the stability calculations, assumptions, tension strengths, design plans, as -built plans, density test results, pictures, and field reconnaissance of the viewable parts of the wall. At time of writing, the final report of the technical review has not been completed for review by staff. The results of the report will be presented to the Planning Commission along with a staff recommendation prior to the hearing date. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION; (AUGUST 6, 2009) Staff requested deferral of this item to the September 3, 2009 meeting to allow additional time for a geotechnical study to be performed on the soils located behind the retaining wall. A review of all design plans, calculations, density tests, and photographs pertaining to the construction of the retaining wall have been conducted which raised several questions pertaining to the parameters used in the design calculations. The deferral was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, and 1 absent. TAFF UPDATE: (AUGUST 27, 2009) Staff has requested the services of Terracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists for evaluation of the stability of the retaining wall system. At the time of writing, staff has continued to meet with the John Johnston of Henry Construction Management, Inc. and 7 September 3, 2009 UBDIVISION ITEM NO.: K (Cont. FILE NO._ LA-0027 Sam Miller, P.E. the design engineer of the retaining wall. Additional information including soil parameters and reports of site the conditions has been provided to staff for review. At the time of the meeting, staff will continue to meet and provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission pertaining to the approval of the variances for wall height and distance between the walls. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating a third party engineering review had been performed on the design of the existing retaining Wall No. 5. Staff stated based on the provided documents, the retaining wall foundation, reinforced backfill, and retained soil zones were excavated in shale bedrock with the shale bedrock exposed in the excavation to an elevation at least equal to the height of the wall. Staff stated data also indicated the angle of internal friction of the AHTD Class 7 aggregate base used as backfill exceeded the angle used in the wall design. Staff stated from this information along with the analysis of other soil and wall parameters, safety factors for the existing Wall No. 5 of at least 1.5 were met as required by the NCMA design guidelines and the International Commercial Building Code when considering internal stability based on the analysis performed by the design engineer of record. Staff stated with this being the case, they recommended approval of the variance request to exceed the maximum retaining wall height, maximum slope (terrace width), and installation of alternative landscaping as found in Section 29-190 of the Land Alteration Regulations. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. ITEM NO.: 11. NAME: Young Short -form PD-R LOCATION: 712 Ash Street Plannina Staff Comments: Z-8471 1. Provide notification of all 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 July 8, 2009. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than July 17, 2009. 2. The development is located within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. The development fully complies with all aspects of the Overlay with the exception of the 40% rear yard coverage. The development is proposed with a 75.34% rear yard coverage. Variance/Waivers. None requested. Public Works Conditions: No comment. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. CATA Bus Route #1 — Pulaski Heights Route is located to the south of the site along Kavanaugh Boulevard. Item # 11. Planninq Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential High Density for this property. The request does not change the use of the property, no change to the Land Use Plan is proposed. Master Street Plan: Ash Street is 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 planned along Kavanaugh Boulevard. 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. Neighborhood„ Action Plan: This area is covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan. Their Housing Goal states: "Pursue establishing an overlay district that protects the eclectic architectural character of the Hillcrest Neighborhood without imposing unreasonable restrictions on property owners' rights to remodel of otherwise alter their property." This PDR application is a direct result of the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. Landscape: No comment. 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, July 8, 2009. Item # 11.