Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1401 Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-7436 NAME: Lusk Long -form PCD LOCATION: 14410 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Ray Lusk 921 Rushing Circle Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 10.18 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential OPOSED ZONING: PCD FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USE: Mini -warehouse development and a strip commercial center VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED public street frontage. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: Plat Variance — The creation of a lot without The applicant proposes a rezoning and the creation of a three lot plat for the proposed development. Lot 1 contains 42,430 square feet and is currently designated for future development with C-3, General Commercial uses. Lot 2 contains 76,532 square feet and proposes a retail building (C-3, General FILE NO.: Z-7436 (Cont. Commercial) with 12,900 square feet of gross floor area and 60 parking spaces or 4.65 per 1,000 square feet. Lot 3 is designated for 88,000 square feet of mini - warehouse in eight buildings and an 1800 square foot office/residence. The three lots will be served by one curb cut off Cantrell Road. The driveway is approximately midway between Candlewood Drive and Pinnacle Valley Road. The development does not abut Candlewood Drive to the east. There is a strip of land not owned by the applicant approximately 30-feet in width between Candlewood Drive and the eastern boundary of the site. Hours of operation for the commercial site are proposed as 7:00 am to 10:00 pm seven days per week and the mini -warehouse is proposed with 24-hour access. The mini -warehouse development will be gated with security access. The applicant has indicated the backs of the mini -warehouse buildings will be used as screening and an eight -foot opaque fence will be installed where there are breaks in the buildings. The applicant also proposes the placement of an eight -foot opaque fence along the northwestern boundary in the area that adjoins the R-2, Single-family zoned property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family structure with a non -conforming industrial use adjacent to the home. A concrete pumping company (the non- conforming industrial use) occupies a single building near the rear of the site. Further to the west of the site is a single-family subdivision with homes fronting onto Pine Mountain Road. Pine Mountain Road is a short cul-de-sac with approximately 30 homes. To the east of the site is the Candlewood Shopping Center (Kroger, Superior Bank, Sonic). To the south of the site is vacant property with a large drainage ditch. There is a mini -warehouse development located south and east of the proposed development and a PCD for a commercial shopping center and a PD-C for a carwash are also located to the southeast. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Westchester and the Westbury Neighborhood Associations, the Pankey Improvement Association and the Secluded Hills Property Owners Association along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. 2 FILE NO.: Z-7436 (Cont. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standards. 2. Access easement must not touch Lot 1 except at future driveway location 150 feet from right-of-way. 3. Provide design and construct right -turn lane onto Pinnacle Valley Road. Coordinate with plans by Pulaski County and with Traffic Engineering, including striping. Dedicate additional right-of-way, if necessary, for street improvements. Re -locate signal equipment. 4. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Sec. 29-186 (e). 5. Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are required. 6. Land Alteration Ordinance applies. Terracing rules apply. 7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 8. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Comply with maximum grade requirements of Section 31-210. 9. A Grading Permit will be required per Sec. 29-186 (c) & (d). % Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work. 11. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for Lot 3. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: A 10-foot easement along all property lines is required. Contact SBC at 373- 5112 (Charles McDonald) for additional details. Central Arkansas Water: An easement and a water main extension will be required to maintain service to the property north of Lot 1. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to service this project, in addition to normal charges. For Lot 2 this will apply to metered connections only. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire facilities will be required. If additional water facilities are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. This development will have minor impact on existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at .992-2438 for additional details. 3 IIIU: IIk[9aWO E. (OMO N I Fire Department: Add fire hydrants on the site. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a retail building at the front of the property and a mini -warehouse at the back of the property. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan contains a goal of preserving the environmental integrity of the area and lists actions statements supporting the enforcement of the Highway 10 design overlay regulations, the tree preservation and hillside excavation ordinances. Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the western perimeter of this development where adjacent to residential property. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to a building permit being obtained, it will be necessary to submit approved landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. Building Codes: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 3, 2003) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff gave an overview of the development to the Committee members indicating the request was for a planned commercial development and as a part of the request the applicant was proposing a preliminary plat containing three lots. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information regarding the driveway widths of the proposed mini -warehouse development. Staff also requested all building setbacks be dimensioned from the property lines. 0 FILE NO.: Z-7436 (Cont. Staff noted the sign would be required to conform to the Highway 10 Design Overlay standards. Staff also noted the area set aside for detention was located in the front area usually designated with a berm under the Highway 10 Overlay Standard. Staff requested additional information concerning the alignment of Pinnacle Valley Road. Staff noted the County had plans to realign Pinnacle Valley Road and Staff questioned if there would be any useable land from an adjoining property located west of Lot 1 after the relocation. Staff suggested the applicant consider allowing access from Lot 1, through the property located to the west, owned by the applicant, to Pine Mountain Road. This would then allow patrons of the development access to the traffic signal at Pinnacle Valley Road and Cantrell Road. Staff stated without this access there were serious concerns with safety from motorists trying to exit the site and travel eastbound. Staff also noted the location of the driveway was very close to the intersection of Pinnacle Valley Road and Highway 10. Staff stated a right turn lane taper would be required and the driveway location was within the taper. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be required and approval from ADEQ would be required prior to the start of work. Staff also noted easements for the proposed stormwater drainage would be required. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted a six foot opaque screen would be required along the western perimeter of the development adjacent to the residentially zoned property. There being no further items for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the July 3, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation for the commercial development will be from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm seven days per week. Staff feels these hours to be conducive to the neighborhood and should have minimal impact on the nearby neighborhoods. The applicant is proposing the mini -warehouse to be 24-hour access. The development will have security access and an on -site manager. With the two security measures in place, this should have minimal impact on the nearby neighbors. In addition, none of the buildings will have doors on the exterior of the site, which should limit the noise from the development into the neighborhood. yi FILE NO.: Z-7436 The applicant has indicated no building constructed will exceed 35-feet in height. The applicant has stated the commercial building located on Lot 2 will be used to screen the rear lot (Lot 3) from Cantrell Road. The site slopes from north to south with the northern elevation being near 340 and the southern elevation (at Cantrell Road) near 308. Grading will take place along the northern portion of the site for the building placement. It appears the building will be set at 318. With the placement of the commercial building in the front of the site, the mini - warehouse development should be screened from the roadway. In addition the area set -aside for the apartment/office will have windows on the face to soften the mini -warehouse look of the building. Staff is supportive of the design of the development and the screening of the mini -warehouses from Cantrell Road. The applicant has also indicated the roof material for the mini -warehouse development will be non -reflective materials. Staff is supportive of the roofing material for the development and feels the chosen material should have the least impact on the surrounding area. The applicant has indicated the building located on Lot 2 will utilize C-3. General Commercial uses. Staff is not supportive of allowing C-3, General Commercial uses on the site. Staff would recommend the applicant utilize the uses in the 0- 3, General Office District and the allowed accessory uses as selected uses for the site. This would allow the applicant limited commercial uses along with office uses for the development. Staff feels this a more acceptable mix for the development and have the least impact on the nearby neighborhoods. The applicant is requesting C-3, General Commercial uses for the proposed Lot 1 as well. Staff is not supportive of including any uses for the lot since no development has been identified. Staff is however, supportive of the proposed platting of Lot 1. Staff feels with Lot 1 being included in the proposed development at this time access to the west can be gained. Staff feels this access is critical to the development. With this access the patrons of the site may access the traffic signal in place at Pinnacle Valley Road. With the protection of the signal the motorist may safely make a left turn to travel eastbound on Cantrell Road. The applicant is proposing signage consistent with the Highway 10 Overlay District. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign to be a maximum of 10-feet in height and 100 square feet in area. The applicant has indicated the sign will be placed on the western side of the single driveway into the development from Cantrell Road. Staff is supportive of the sign design and placement. The applicant has indicated the 25-foot proposed future driveway along proposed Lot 1 at 75 feet. Staff recommends the driveway location be at least 150-feet from the property line adjacent to Cantrell Road. Although there are some concerns with the placement of this future driveway location staff feels the 0 FILE NO.: Z-7436 (Cont. driveway location appropriate to line-up with the future access to Pinnacle Valley Road. The applicant is proposing variances from the Subdivision Ordinance with the proposed preliminary plat, a component of this development. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage (Section 31-231). The applicant has indicated a 60-foot wide access and utility easement for the development. There is also parcel of property located to the north of proposed Lot 1 which is currently land -locked and serviced by an access easement along the eastern property line of proposed Lot 1. With the placement of the access and utility easement, the land -locked parcel will maintain access to their property. Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow the lot to develop in this manner. The proposed access easement should allow access to the site and have minimal impact in the future. The applicant is proposing the placement of 50 parking spaces on proposed Lot 2. This should be adequate to service the development. If the site were to develop as requested (C-3, General Commercial uses) then the development would require a typical minimum parking requirement of 43 parking spaces. With the proposed development developing with 0-3, General Office uses the typical minimum parking demand would be 32 parking spaces. The proposed parking for the proposed Lot 2 should be sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The applicant is proposing the placement of three parking spaces on proposed Lot 3. The typical minimum parking demand for an office/apartment would be five parking spaces; based on one space per four hundred square feet. Although the proposed parking is not sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking demand, the parking proposed should be adequate to serve the site. The mini - warehouse portion of the site will utilize the access drives and warehouse bays for parking. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. Staff recommends the preliminary plat be approved as presented and is supportive of the variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. Staff is supportive of the development on proposed Lots 2 and 3 if Lot 2 is developed utilizing the 0-3, General Office District uses and the 0-3 allowed accessory uses. Staff is not supportive of the development if the applicant intends to develop the site with the requested C-3, General Commercial District uses. Staff is also not supportive of allowing Lot 1 to be developed without a specific use or a building footprint. Staff feels the speculative development does not follow the previous pattern established for development along the Highway 10 Corridor. Ire FILE NO.: Z-7436 (Cont. Staff does not recommend approval of the inclusion of the proposed Lot 1 within the Planned Commercial Development since no site plan has been submitted for development of this lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of this report. Staff recommends the development be developed utilizing 0-3, General Office District uses. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage for proposed Lot 3. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (J U LY 24, 2003) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were objectors present. Staff introduced the item with a recommendation of approval of the Future Land Use Plan amendment. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested preliminary plat and the requested PCD for Lots 2 and 3. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting 0-3 uses as allowable uses for Lot 2 and the accessory uses listed under the 0-3 classification. Staff stated there would not be a limit placed on the gross floor area allowed for the accessory uses. Mr. Nathan Culp spoke in opposition of the proposal. He stated the neighborhood was not opposed to the development of Lot 3, the mini -warehouse development or the development of Lot 2 with 0-3 uses and the accessory uses. He stated the neighborhood was opposed to changing the Future Land Use Plan to include the large area of commercial. He stated the idea of the Highway 10 Overlay District was to create commercial nodes. He stated with the change this was eating away at the commercial node and creating a linear commercial development along the roadway. Ms. Virginia Strohmeyer-Miles spoke in opposition of the proposed change. She stated she was the secretary of the Westbury Neighborhood Association. Ms. Miles stated the city was encouraging the development of Cantrell Road as a commercial strip by changing the Future Land Use Plan for the area. She stated there was not a development proposed for Lot 1 and by changing the land use at this time this was encouraging the development of the lot as a commercial use. There was a general discussion concerning Lot 1 and the change of the Future Land Use plan without a development proposal. There were concerns by the Commission of the treatment of Lot 1 in the future. The discussion concerned the allowable uses for Lot 1 and the potential for the lot to develop as a commercial site if shown on the Future Land Use Plan as a commercial site. 0 FILE NO.: Z-7436 (Cont. The applicant requested Lot 1 be removed from the Future Land Use Plan amendment. A motion was made to approve the Future Land Use Plan amendment as amended to exclude the area indicated as Lot 1. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 no and 1 absent. A motion was made to approve the PCD request as amended to include 0-3 including the listed accessory uses for Lot 2, the mini -warehouse development on Lot 3 and the removal of Lot 1 from the PCD request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes 1 absent. A motion was made to approve the preliminary plat as filed and the requested variances. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no and 2 absent. 9