Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_10 19 1993LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING MINUTE RECORD OCTOBER 19, 1993 12:30 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eight in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The minutes of the September 7, 1993 meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Brad Walker Ramsay Ball Diane Chachere Kathleen Oleson Bill Putnam Joe Selz Jim VonTungeln Emmett Willis, Jr. Ronald Woods (arrived after the roll call) Jerilyn Nicholson (One Open Position) City Attorney: Stephen Giles LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING I. DEFERRED ITEMS A. Z-5686 B. Z -3844-B C. Z -4625-A D. Z -5099-A E. Z-5726 II. REZONING ITEMS 1. Z -4172-A 2. Z-5742 AGENDA OCTOBER 19, 1993 4807 Ballinger Fairview and Pleasant Ridge 1202 and 1206 North University Avenue Hwy. 10, Hwy. 300 and Chenal Parkway Peach Tree Drive West 44th and Western Hills Chester at Wright Ave. III. OTHER MATTERS 3. Curran Conway C.U.P. (Z-5743) R-2 to R-5 MF -6 and R-2 to 0-3 R-2 to O-1 R-2, 0-3 and C-2 to MF -18, 0-3 and C-3 R-2 to O-3 MF -18 & 0-2 to I-2 R-4 to 0-3 and Wright Avenue Right -of -Way Abandonment 1 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.• A Z-5686 Owner: Ike Uketui Applicant: Ike Uketui Location: 4807 Ballinger Request: Rezone from R-2 to R-5 Purpose: Multifamily Size: 0.9 acres Existing Use: Single -Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Railroad tracks, zoned R-2 South - Single -Family, zoned R-2 East - Single -Family and Multifamily, zoned R-2 and R-5 West - Single -Family, zoned R-3 STAFF ANALYSIS 4807 Ballinger Road is occupied by a single family residence and the owner would like to convert the building to four or five units. To allow the increase in the number of dwelling units, the property must first be rezoned to R-5. The existing residence sits on the front 1/4 of the lot and the rear 3/4 is undeveloped. The site has 125 feet of frontage on Ballinger and a depth of 410 feet. Zoning is R-2, R-3, R-5 and I-2, with the property in question abutting R-2, R-3 and R-5. There are several tracts to the east that are zoned R-5 and two of them appear to be undeveloped. The I-2 is found to the northeast, east and southeast, the industrial area that is along Patterson Road. Land use is made up of single family, commercial and industrial. There are no conventional multifamily developments in the immediate vicinity. The abutting R-5 is developed with several detached single family structures. The proposed R-5 rezoning is in conflict with the adopted 65th Street East Plan, and staff does not support the request. The plan does not recognize the existing R-5 on Hoffman and the nearest multifamily area shown on the plan is approximately 1/4 mile to south. It is our position that October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: A Z-5686 (Cont.) the recommended land use pattern should be maintained by not approving the proposed R-5 reclassification. Endorsing the R-5 could create additional problems for the area, which has already been impacted by some of the multifamily sites found along Butler Road. Another concern is that R-5 rezoning could allow between 20 to 25 units based on the lot size and the land area per family requirement in the R-5 district. A large number of units on the property could create an undesirable living environment, and impact the livability of the entire neighborhood. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The request is in conflict with the plan. The 65th Street East Plan recommends single family for this location. Conditions have not changed in the area to warrant a plan amendment. ENGINEERING COMMENTS There are none to be reported. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the R-5 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 15, 1993) Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred because the applicant did not notify the property owners. As part of the Consent Agenda, the issue was deferred to the July 27, 1993 hearing. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 27, 1993) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested a deferral to October 19, 1993 hearing. As part of the Consent Agenda, the Commission voted to defer the issue to October 19, 1993. The vote was 7 ayes, 0 nays and 4 absent. 2 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: A Z-5686 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) Staff updated the Commission and indicated that the owner would like to amend the application to PRD for a total of four units, and had submitted a letter requesting the PRD. Staff stated that they were still opposed to any multifamily reclassification of the site. Ike Uketui, the owner, was present. There was one objector in attendance. Mr. Uketui discussed his understanding of the property's zoning and said that he was informed by the City Enforcement staff that a portion of the site was zoned for multifamily use. Mr. Uketui went on to say that he purchased the property based on the information provided by the City. He then discussed his plans for the property and said he would like to be allowed to use the land for a maximum of three units. There was a long discussion about the request and the property zoning. Benjamin Watson, a resident on Apple Cove, objected to the proposed reclassification and submitted a petition opposed to the rezoning. Mr. Watson described the neighborhood and some of the area's problems. He then reminded the Commission that Butler Road was located in the general vicinity. A motion was made to defer the item to allow the staff and Mr. Uketui to resolve the zoning question. The issue was deferred to the November 30, 1993 hearing. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. 3 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: B Z -3844-B Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Gerald K. and Jaquetta Johnson J. E. Hathaway, Jr. Fairview Road and Pleasant Ridge Road Rezone from MF -6 and R-2 to O-3 Office Development 2.24 acres vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, zoned R-2 South - Vacant, Easter Seals and Commercial, zoned R-2, 0-2 and 0-3 East - Single -Family, zoned R-2 West - Vacant and Single -Family, zoned R-2 and R-3 STAFF ANALYSIS The property in question is located at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Pleasant Ridge Road. The request is to rezone the site from MF -6 and R-2 to 0-3. The MF -6 land has frontage on both streets and the R-2 portion is situated on Pleasant Ridge, just west of Woodland Heights. As of this writing, no specific use or user has been identified. The entire site is vacant and wooded. Zoning found in the general vicinity includes R-2, R-3, 0-2, 0-3, PRD and PCD. The property abuts R-2 zoned land on the north and east. To the west is the Cedar Branch Subdivision and it is zoned R-3. Across Pleasant Ridge, the zoning is R-2, 0-2 and 0-3. The land use includes single family, a church and school, office, a dog kennel and an Easter Seals facility. The single family neighborhoods include a well- established area along Summit Road, the Pleasant Forest Subdivision and a small developing addition, Cedar Branch. The dog kennel is a nonconforming use and there are still some undeveloped tracts. At this time, the nonresidential uses are situated to the south of Pleasant Ridge/Woodland Heights. At the intersection of Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge, there are some commercial uses, however, they are somewhat removed from the area under consideration. October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: B Z -3844-B (Cont.) The River Mountain District Plan identifies the site as part of a single family area. It is the staff's position that the land use plan's direction should be maintained by not endorsing the requested office reclassification. Conditions have not changed enough to justify a modification of the plan to support a nonresidential rezoning at this time. In fact, it appears that there is some renewed interest in single family development because of the amount of new construction underway in the Cedar Branch Subdivision, which is directly to the west. Staff views the area north of Pleasant Ridge as best suited for residential development and cannot support the 0-3 request. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The adopted land use plan in the River Mountain District recommends single family use for the area. The recent development of single family homes to the west indicates the reasonableness of the plan. Conditions have not changed to warrant amending the plan. ENGINEERING COMMENTS The existing right-of-way for Fairview is deficient and dedication of additional right-of-way is needed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the 0-3 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 7, 1993) Staff reported that the applicant had submitted a request for a deferral. As part of the Consent Agenda, the item was deferred to the October 19, 1993 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting a deferral, but it was received less than the required five working days. Therefore, the Commission would have to waive the Bylaws to accept the deferral request. Jeff Hathaway was present and offered some comments about the case and the need to defer the item. E October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: B Z -3844-B (Cont.) Cloie Morgan, a resident of the Cedar Branch Subdivision, addressed the Commission and said that she was in support of the deferral. The item was added to the Consent Agenda and deferred to November 30, 1993 meeting. The Commission also waived the bylaws. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. 3 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: C Z -4625-A Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Mark Weedman and the Estate of Jim Goad Everett O. Martindale 1202 and 1206 North University Rezone from R-2 to O-1 Office 0.49 acres Vacant and Single -Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family, zoned R-2 South - Office, zoned 0-3 East - Vacant, zoned R-2 West - Single -Family, zoned R-2 STAFF ANALYSIS The Northwest corner of Evergreen and North University is currently zoned R-2, and the request is to rezone the property to 0-1 for an office use. On the northern portion of the site, there is a single family residence and the remaining land area, the south 96 feet, is vacant. The area that is undeveloped has never been used for anything. The property has 134 feet of frontage on Evergreen and 160 feet on the North University side. Zoning is made up of R-2, R-4, R-5, MF -6, MF -12, 0-2, 0-3, PCD, and OS. To the east of North University and to the south of Evergreen, the zoning pattern is somewhat fragmented and includes single family, multifamily and office zoned properties. The northeast, southeast and southwest corners of the Evergreen/North University intersection are all zoned either 0-2 or 0-3. The office zoning at the northeast corner does not abut Evergreen or North University because there is a R-2 buffer between the streets and the 0-3 land. On the Evergreen side, the buffer is 50 feet and along North University it is at least 100 feet wide. The property in question borders R-2 lots on the north and west sides. Land use includes single family, multifamily, office and a junior high school. The existing land use is very similar to the zoning and there are no nonresidential uses to the northwest of the North University/Evergreen intersection. October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: C Z -4625-A (Cont.) There have been two other attempts to rezone all or part of the property under consideration. In 1985, a PCD request was filed for the south 48 feet of the site to permit a real estate office. The reclassification was denied by the Planning Commission and their action was never appealed to the City Board of Directors. The following year, 1986, an 0-3 application was filed for the entire site. There was strong neighborhood opposition and the office rezoning was disapproved by the Planning Commission. There was no appeal to the City Board of Directors. Staff did not support the 0-3 rezoning in 1986 and had some reservations about the PCD proposal. Staff's position is that nothing has changed in the neighborhood to justify a nonresidential rezoning at the northwest corner of the Evergreen/North University intersection and recommends that the 0-1 request not be endorsed. By placing the R-2 buffer on the east side of North University, it is apparent that a conscious effort was made to protect the well-established neighborhood west of North University from nonresidential encroachment. Another factor that is critical to this request is the district plan for the area. The West Little Rock Land Use Plan shows the northwest corner of Evergreen and North University for continued single family use. Therefore, the proposed office reclassification is in conflict with the adopted plan. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The adopted land use plan in the West Little Rock District recommends single family for this location. Any nonresidential use would have to be carefully and thoroughly reviewed to address impacts on surrounding development. Conditions to warrant a plan amendment have not been met. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Evergreen is classified as a collector and the existing right-of-way is deficient. The Master Street Plan standard for a collector is 30 feet from the center line and dedication of additional right-of-way is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the 0-1 rezoning request. 2 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: C Z -4625-A (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 7, 1993) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred because of a notice problem. As part of the Consent Agenda, the Planning Commission voted to defer the issue to the October 19, 1993 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting that the 0-1 be amended to a POD for a professional office. Staff indicated that there were several problems with the proposed site plan, and that they were still opposed to any nonresidential reclassifi- cation of the site. Staff also reminded the Commission of the petition opposed to any rezoning. (Copies were provided to the commissioners.) The applicant, Everett Martindale, was present. There were approximately 15 objectors in attendance. Mr. Martindale said that he has made an offer to purchase both lots for his office. He went on to say that he would make improvements to the property, but there would be no physical changes to the existing structure. Mr. Martindale also said that he would like to leave as many trees as possible on the site. Mr. Martindale said that the best use of the property was not residential, and he would do whatever was necessary to accommodate the neighbors and was willing to work with them. George Campbell asked that the opposition be allowed to speak first. Craig Douglas objected to the proposed rezoning and then described the area and the existing zoning. Mr. Douglas said the northwest corner of Evergreen and North University was part of several neighborhoods and the rezoning would impact property values. He asked the Commission to deny the request. David Nelson, a resident on Garfield, said he mailed letters to all of the commissioners and was concerned with traffic. Mr. Nelson said there was no need for more office zoning in the area. Bobbie Buchman, #3 Gay Place, addressed the Commission and presented a graphic. Ms. Buchman said she was speaking for the neighborhood and described the area as being very stable. Ms. Buchman used the graphic to show the area and 3 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: C Z -4625-A (Cont.) said the home owners would like the neighborhood to remain residential. She said the rezoning was not in the best interest of the neighborhood. Ms. Buchman said there were problems with the proposed POD site plan and expressed concerns with the parking design and the sign. She went on to discuss traffic issues and submitted some photos. Ms. Buchman said it would be a traffic hazard to have a nonresidential use on the corner. Ms. Buchman concluded by saying that the area was a single family neighborhood and there were better locations for a professional office. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, asked the Commission to support the land use plan. Ms. Bell said that the corner has always been shown for residential use and no clear need for additional office zoning has been demonstrated. George Campbell spoke and said he has been marking the property since 1987 and there has been no interest shown for residential use. Mr. Campbell then discussed the area. He said the residence was currently rented to the Center for Youth and Families. Mr. Campbell told the Commission that the real estate sign on the property has "nonresidential potential" on it. Everett Martindale spoke again and said he would like to buy the property. Mr. Martindale said he was uncertain about the landscaping and the sign would not be distasteful. Mr. Martindale went on to say that he would like to be a good neighbor. There was a long discussion about the POD and comments were offered by George Campbell and Bobbie Buchman. Comments were made by various commissioners about the neighborhood and the corner was important to the residential integrity of the area. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, made comments about zoning, and said that one rezoning does not establish precedence for an area to rezone other properties. Everett Martindale spoke and said he was willing to develop a better plan and to talk to the neighbors. Bobbie Buchman said the rezoning would have a domino effect, and the location was inappropriate for office use. She said the neighborhood was opposed to any nonresidential reclassification. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, responded to some legal questions and said there was a rational basis to deny the rezoning. 4 r to October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: C Z -4625-A (Cont.) There was some discussion about deferring the item. Bobby Buchman spoke again and asked that the Commission vote on the request. Everett Martindale asked the Commission to defer the rezoning request to November 30, 1993. A motion was made to defer the item. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes, 7 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. A second motion was made to recommend approval of the POD request as amended. The vote was 0 ayes, 9 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. The POD request was denied because the motion failed. 5 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: D Z -5099-A Owner: Eugene M. Pfeifer, III and Pfeifer Development Applicant: Eugene M. Pfeifer, III by Joe D. White Location: Highway 10, Highway 300 and Chenal Parkway Request: Rezone from R-2, C-2 and 0-3 to MF -18, 0-3, C-3 Purpose: Multifamily, Office and Commercial Size: 68.79 acres (total) Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, zoned R-2 South - Vacant, Church and AP&L Substation, zoned R-2, 0-2, C-2 and C-3 East - Vacant and AP&L Substation, zoned R-2 and C-2 West - Vacant, Church, Commercial and Camp Grundy, zoned R-2 and C-2 STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Planning Commission involves a total of approximately 69 acres, and the site is located in the general vicinity of Highway 10, Highway 300 and the Chenal Parkway. The following is a breakdown of the proposed rezonings and the acreage. 1. R-2 to C-3 (Highway 300) - 3.68 acres and 11.5 acres 2. R-2 to MF -18 - 12.91 acres and 18.5 acres 3. R-2 and 0-3 to 0-3 - 10.65 acres 4. R-2 and C-2 to C-3 (Highway 10) - 11.56 acres All of the tracts have frontage on the Chenal Parkway and extend from Highway 300 to Highway 10. The entire acreage is vacant and heavily wooded. October 19, 1993 ITEM NO D Z -5099-A (Cont.) The existing nonresidential zoning, 0-3 and C-2, was granted in 1989. The remaining area was classified R-2 as part of the extraterritorial zoning effort for Area I. A PCD was approved for a portion of the 0-3 and C-2, however, the necessary final plan has never been submitted. Zoning in the general vicinity is R-2, 0-2, C-1 and C-2. The adjacent zoning is R-2, 0-2, and C-2. The most recent rezoning action in the area involved some land on the south side of Highway 10, part of the Deltic Holding at the intersection of the Chenal Parkway and Highway 10. An eleven acre tract was rezoned from MF -18 to C-3 and added some additional land to the existing commercial node. Land use includes single family, a church and some small scaled commercial uses. Across Highway 300 is Camp Grundy, a children summer camp, and there is also an AP&L substation adjoining the site on the southeast corner. Several of the existing uses are nonconforming and there are vacant tracts found throughout the area. The adopted district plan, Pinnacle, does identify the Highway 10/Chenal Parkway intersection as a commercial node, with commercial areas shown on both sides of Highway 10. Because of the plan and the location, the requested C-3 rezoning at Highway 10 is appropriate. Changing some of the designated commercial area from C-2 to C-3 should not have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties. The plan also recognizes an office area along the parkway. Therefore, increasing the amount of 0-3 land is compatible with the plan. Rezoning 31 acres to MF -18 is reasonable because it establishes a transition area between the nonresidential lands to the southeast and the single family areas to the northwest. Also, 12 to 18 units per acre has been the density level that has been supported in the western part of the city. Creating another commercial area at Highway 300 and the Parkway Extension is in conflict with the adopted plan and should not be endorsed through this request. At this time, there is no justification for adding 15 acres of commercial land adjacent to Highway 300 because there is an adequate amount of commercial acreage at the Highway 10 node. If the City approves the 11.5 acres for C-3, there will be close to 70 acres available for commercial development at the Highway 10/Chenal Parkway intersection. Approval of the C-3 for the Highway 300 location could establish undesirable precedent for the area and lead to a questionable zoning pattern. 2 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: D Z -5099-A (Cont.) LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The adopted plan in the Pinnacle District recommends commercial and office for the Highway 10 area and single family for the Highway 300 area. Staff does agree that additional office should be shown on the Highway 10 frontage (east of church) with multifamily to the north as a transition from commercial to single family. However, the proposed intersection of Highway 300 and Chenal is a minor intersection and does not justify intensive land uses. An amendment to add the previously mentioned office and multifamily is appropriate, however no other intensification is warranted. ENGINEERING COMMENTS The Chenal Parkway needs to be dedicated and completed to Highway 300. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of except for the 15 acres for Chenal Parkway. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: all of the requested rezonings, C-3 at Highway 300 and the (SEPTEMBER 7, 1993) Staff informed the Planning Commission that the applicant had failed to notify the required property owners. As part of the Consent Agenda, the item was deferred to the October 19, 1993 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) The applicant, Gene Pfeifer, was present. There were several interested individuals in attendance. Mr. Pfeifer spoke and suggested that the Commission hear from the other persons first. David Jones addressed the Commission and said that he represented 11 property owners along Highway 10. Mr. Jones then read a letter into the record and submitted a copy to the Chairman. (See attached copy.) Jim Lawson, Director of Neighborhoods and Planning, responded to David Jones' letter and discussed other aspects of the request before the Commission. October 19, 1993 ITEM NO • D Z -5099-A (Cont.) David Jones spoke again and addressed Mr. Lawson's comments. Mr. Jones also discussed the Highway 10 overlay zone and the land use plan. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, spoke and discussed the various ordinances addressing development along the Highway 10. Sam Robinson, a property owner on Highway 300, said that he had no comments to offer. (Marilyn Dunavant filled out a registration card, but she left before Item D was discussed by the Commission.) Gene Pfeifer then addressed the Commission. Mr. Pfeifer presented a zoning history of the Highway 10/Chenal Parkway intersection, and said the current request was an effort to clean-up some of the zoning lines. Mr. Pfeifer then reminded the Commission that the request had been amended by the removal of the proposed C-3 rezoning at Highway 300 and the Chenal Parkway. Ruth Ann Robinson said the rezonings were totally logical and she supported the request. A motion was then made to recommend approval of the request as amended. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 1 nay, 2 absent, 1 abstention (Diane Chachere) and 1 open position. 4 VOGEL REALTY COMPANY 11219 FINANCIAL CENTRE PARKWAY FINANCIAL PARK PLACE - SUITE 300 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72211 PHONE. AC 501-225.6018 FAX. 501-225-6308 October 19, 1993 Mr. Jim Lawson Director Department of Neighborhoods and Planning City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Jim, In reference to Gene Pfeifer's request for the re -zoning of his property located on the North Side of the intersection at State Highway Number 10 and Chenal Parkway, I have the following comments: 1. I salute Mr. Pfeifer's bravado in asking for additional commercial acreage along the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor. Not too many months ago, it seemed his position was that he was against the proliferation of Commercial zoning in the area. Such expansion was "contrary to the Highway 10 Plan" and that it would "de -value the existing Commercially zoned property in the area", I remember him saying. I am heartened by Mr. Pfiefer's apparent change in attitude. 2. While I support the concept that additional commercial acreage is a given along the Highway 10 corridor, I urge the City to be consistent in its application of the "enhanced design criteria" development regulations required of all other developments along Highway 10. The "Overlay Zone" requires all developments to be submitted as a "PCD" along Highway 10. Several of the commercial "nodes" were excluded from this requirement but any expansions of the "nodes" to -date have required "PCD" submittals (i.e. Harvest Foods). Any deviation from these requirements smacks of preferential treatment. October 19, 1993 Jim Lawson Page 2 3. As you know, there is currently a disparity between the City's development requirements applied to Highway 10 property and that of every other area and corridor of this City. While I do not agree with this discriminatory policy, until such time until the legality of such policies is determined, the City of Little Rock needs to be consistent in its application of such development regulations and requirements across the Board so as not to open the Clty up to future legal challenges. 4. I support the principle of Mr. Pfiefer's re -zoning request but urge the Commission to require all developments submitted for this property to be in the form of a "PCD" until such time that the Highway 10 Overlay Zone regulations are modified. Yours Truly, a David J. Jones cc: Jim Dailey Jessee Mason Sharon Priest Hampton Roy, M.D. John Lewellyn John Adcock Jeff Sharp October 19, 1993 ITEM NO,: E Z-5726 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: D. B. Davis Corporation J. E. Hathaway, Jr. Peach Tree Drive Rezone from R-2 to 0-3 Office 0.74 acres Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Koger Office Development, zoned 0-3 South - I-430 Right -of -Way, zoned R-2 East - I-430 Right-of-way, zoned R-2 West - Single -Family, zoned R-2 STAFF ANALYSIS The site on Peach Tree Drive is currently zoned R-2, and the request is to rezone the location to 0-3 for future office use. The property is situated at the entrance to the Sandpiper Subdivision and is adjacent to I-430. In fact, a portion of the tract was taken for use as right-of-way for I-430. The site has approximately 273 feet of frontage on Peach Tree Drive. Zoning in the general area is R-2, 0-1, 0-2, 0-3 and OS. There is also a large PCD, the Summit Mall site, on the south side of I-430. The property in question abuts R-2 land on three sides and 0-3 zoning is directly across Peach Tree Drive. Land use is primarily single family and the Koger Office Development. At the corner of Hickory Hill and Peach Tree is the location of the subdivision's recreational area. There is undeveloped land throughout the area, especially to the west of Centerview Drive. Because of the property's location and other factors, it does appear that the site has some potential for limited nonresidential development. However, it is questionable whether 0-3 is the best zoning approach for the site. The lot has a 40 foot platted building line, and because of a very shallow lot depth, the addition of the 15 foot rear October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: E Z-5726 (Cont.) yard setback could severely limit the use of the property, possibly make it unfeasible to develop. Staff suggests a POD as a better option for the site because it does offer more flexibility. The property is somewhat unique, and the POD process is designed for atypical situations. Also, a POD would insure that any development (site plan) is sensitive to the residential lots located directly to the west. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The adopted plan in the I-430 District recommends either no use or office. Any office use should be carefully designed to minimize any negative impacts to adjacent single family. ENGINEERING COMMENTS There are none to be reported. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the 0-3 rezoning and suggests that the POD process be utilized for the property. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 7, 1993) Staff reported that the applicant had requested that the item be deferred. There were two objectors present, and there was a brief discussion about deferring the issue. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the October 19, 1993 meeting. The Commission's vote was 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent and 1 abstention (Kathleen Oleson). (The Planning Commission's action also waived the deferral provision in the bylaws requiring a written request five working days prior to the meeting.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) Staff told the Commission that the applicant had submitted a written request for a deferral, however, it was not received at least five working days prior to the hearing. After some discussion, the item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 30, 1993 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. (The Commission's action also waived the Bylaw provision for requesting a deferral.) 2 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO • 1 Z -4172-A Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Atley G. Davis Atley G. Davis West 44th Street and Western Hills Avenue Rezone from MF -18 and 0-2 to I-2 Industrial (Equipment Storage) 1.3 acres Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Industrial, zoned I-2 South - Single -Family, zoned R-2 East - Golf Course, zoned R-2 and MF -12 West - Business School, zoned 0-2 STAFF ANALYSIS The property in question is situated at the northwest corner of Western Hills and West 44th, one block south of Asher Avenue. The request is to rezone the site, 1.3 acres, from MF -18 and 0-2 to I-2. The proposal is for the industrial user, Davis Trailer and Track, located directly to the north, to utilize the acreage for equipment storage. At this time, the land is vacant and wooded. Zoning in the general area is very mixed and includes R-2, MF -12, 0-1, 0-2, C-3, C-4 and I-2. The site abuts I-2 on the north and 0-2 on the west. Across Western Hills and West 44th, the existing zoning is R-2. The 0-2 lots were rezoned in 1984 and the action reclassified all the lots along the north side of West 44th to 0-2. Land use is similar to the zoning and is made up of single family, commercial, industrial, schools, post office, a church and a golf course. The area south of West 44th is a well-established neighborhood and the golf course is found on the east side of Western Hills. The land use configuration along Asher Avenue is primarily a combination of commercial and industrial uses. There are also some undeveloped tracts and vacant buildings in the area. October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4172-A (Cont.) A rezoning of the site under consideration to I-2 is in conflict with the adopted plan and staff cannot support an industrial reclassification for the property. The existing MF -18 and 0-2 zoning provides a good transition between the I-2 zoning to the north and the R-2 neighborhood south of West 44th Street. Extending industrial zoning to West 44th Street could have an adverse impact on the nearby residential lots and could also establish undesirable precedent for the area. The existing zoning pattern and land use concept are working, and should be maintained by not endorsing the requested rezoning. Another concern is West 44th, which is a substandard street, and cannot handle industrial type traffic. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site in question is in the Boyle Park District. The request is in conflict with the adopted plan which calls for single family. Since there is existing single family across the street and the conditions have not changed, there is no reason to amend the plan for a higher use. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Western Hills is classified as a collector. The right-of-way standard is 30 feet from the centerline. Dedication of additional right-of-way will be required because the existing right-of-way is deficient. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the I-2 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) The applicant, Atley Davis, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Davis spoke and gave some history on the site. Mr. Davis said the lots have never been used for anything other than the storage of junk cars. He said the company needed the additional property for parking and equipment storage. Mr. Davis continued by saying they would be willing to make the necessary improvements, and there would be no access to West 44th Street. Bob Brown, Plans Specialist for the City, commented on the buffer requirement along West 44th and said the maximum would be 20 feet. Mr. Brown also said that a fence would be required. 2 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4172-A (Cont.) Harold Majors, owner of the company, said the site would be used primarily for employee parking. Mr. Majors went on to say access would be limited to Asher and Western Hills. Mr. Majors also suggested that the property could be used for the storage and parking of trucks needing modification. There was some discussion about various issues. Harold Majors made some additional comments and said there would be no increase in traffic. Discussion continued on buffering the property and the possibility of deferring the item. A motion was then made to defer the issue to the November 30, 1993 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent and 1 open position. 3 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO • 2 Z-5742 Owner: R. L. Settles Applicant: Joe D. White Location: Chester at Wright Avenue Request: Rezone from R-4 to 0-3 and Wright Avenue Right-of-way Abandonment Purpose: Office Size: 0.34 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - vacant, zoned R-4 South - Single -Family, zoned R-4 East - Commercial, zoned C-3 west - Single -Family, zoned R-4 STAFF ANALYSIS The southwest corner of Chester and (old) Wright Avenue is zoned R-4, and the request is to rezone the property to 0-3 for future development. The site is two 50 foot lots and each has a depth of 150 feet. Both lots are vacant at this time. (Through the urban renewal project for the area, "new" Wright Avenue was constructed to the north primarily to reduce the amount of nonlocal traffic on the narrow Wright Avenue and going through the neighborhood.) Between the property in question and "new" Wright Avenue is the old right-of-way and a small parcel of land that is owned by the City. Zoning in the neighborhood is R-4, R-6, 0-3 and C-3. The Capitol Zoning District starts 2 1/2 blocks to the east, between State and Gaines Streets. At the intersection of Chester and Wright, the current zoning is R-4 and C-3. There is also some C-3 zoning along Izard Street, 1/2 block to the east. The existing land use pattern includes residential, commercial, several schools, a number of churches and the Dunbar Community Center. In the block under consideration, the lots are either vacant or occupied by single family residences. Across Chester Street, there is a service station/auto repair garage, zoned C-3. A large October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-5742 (Cont.) area to the north is the location of Gibbs School, Dunbar Junior High and the Dunbar Community Center. Some of the existing zoning and land use patterns are the result of several urban renewal program for the area. At the intersection of Wright and Chester, there is a visible break in the land use. North of Wright, the uses along Chester are more mixed and the neighborhood has been impacted by the existing R-6 and C-3 zoning. To the south of Wright, the zoning is R-4 and the prevalent land use is single family residences. Because of the change in land use at the intersection, it is the staff's position that the block between Wright and West 19th can be viewed as transitional, with the possibility of accommodating some type of office use. It appears that an a nonresidential rezoning of the two lots is a reasonable option because of the site's location. After careful review of the request, staff feels that 0-1 is more appropriate for the site. The purpose and intense section of the 0-1 district states: The area standards provided in the 0-1 Quiet Office district anticipate that office uses will be located in the established areas of the City and in close proximity to apartments and other residential uses. Height, area and off-street parking regulations are designed to assure that office uses will be compatible with adjacent residential districts. New construction designed to reinforce existing desirable characteristics of the neighborhood and not detrimental to the continued use of single family properties for residential purposes shall also be accommodated in this district. 0-1 and 0-3 basically allow the same uses, so an 0-1 reclassification should not affect the future plans for the property. Quality infill development in the central city area should be encouraged, but at the same time, the new development needs to be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood. Any proposed project needs to be designed so as not add to the existing problems found in the area and to ensure compatibility with the nearby residential lots. Therefore, staff is recommending that several conditions be attached to the rezoning action. The conditions are: • The design of the structure reinforce the residential character of the block. 0 Close the (old) Wright Avenue right-of-way. October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-5742 (Cont.) • The development should be oriented towards Wright Avenue. • A "good neighbor" fence be installed. • A monument sign, made out of brick. • The parking area be designed so as not to impact the adjacent residential lots. • The site be heavily landscaped. By incorporating the above conditions into the site plan, staff feels that the rezoning and development should not create any problems for the neighborhood. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site in question is in the Central City District. The request is in conflict with the adopted plan which calls for single family. Chester and 17th/Wright is a minor intersection which historically has been a major intersection. This intersection also is a place where the land use pattern makes a major change from commercial, office and multifamily to single family. At such a place, new development which does or could change the balance must be carefully reviewed. In order to let the neighborhood and the development community know that alternatives will at least be considered, the plan should be changed to mixed use. Note mixed use should be residential first and nonresidential uses should be designed to be compatible with residential uses using the planned unit development process. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Engineering recommends that the west 20 feet of the right- of-way be left open to provide access for the alley and a driveway apron be constructed onto Wright Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of an 0-1 rezoning for the site and not the 0-3 as requested. We also recommend that the seven conditions be included in the Planning Commission s action. 3 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-5742 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 19, 1993) The applicant, Joe White, was present. There were no objectors in attendance. Mr. White spoke and agreed with 0-1 and all the conditions outlined in the staff analysis. A motion was made to recommend approval of the amended request to 0-1 with the seven conditions, and the right-of-way abandonment. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent and 1 open position. 4 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-5743 NAME: Curran Conway Park - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: West 24th Street and Harrison Street OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Little Rock Parks and Recreation Department PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is • requested to allow for the installation of certain improvements on this existing 25 acre city park, zoned R-3 . The proposed improvements include a new component playground system, informal soccer fields, picnic pavilion, a bikeway and the installation of an outfield wall for the existing baseball field. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location Curran Conway Park occupies 25 acres of wooded, gently rolling land located within an area bounded by West 24th Street, Monroe Street, West 26th Street and Harrison Street. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood The park was originally developed by the Little Rock Boys Club many years ago and was sold to the City of Little Rock in July 1977. Much of the site has remained in an undeveloped state with the baseball field being the primary traffic generator for the park. Staff has concerns about only one aspect of the proposed improvements, that being the outfield wall. With the resolution of this one issue, the other proposed improvements should be compatible with the neighborhood. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking There are currently approximately 110 on-site parking spaces. The majority of these are clustered in the west end of the park, near the playground and the entrance to the baseball field. . October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 3 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5743 If the soccer fields are successfully developed, additional parking may be needed in the east end of the park, which is separated from the west end by Blakemore Ditch and an area of dense woods. 4. Screening and Buffers No additional screening or buffers required. 5. City Engineer Comments No comments 6. utility Comments No comments 7. Analysis All in all, staff feels that the proposed improvements are a welcomed addition to this existing park. The soccer fields, playground expansion, bikeway and picnic pavilion will allow for greater neighborhood usage of this largely unused city park. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock baseball team uses Curran Conway field as its home field. Over the years, the UALR baseball team has made many improvements to the field and has now erected a new outfield wall. The wall will serve the dual purpose of containing the field of play (reducing the number of balls hit out of the park) and of providing more area to be made available as advertising space. The wall, as constructed, has generated much neighborhood opposition. The City of Little Rock Department of Parks and Recreation is working with neighborhood residents and UALR to find an amicable resolution to this issue. 8. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the application subject to resolution of the outfield wall issue. 2 October 19, 1993 ITEM NO.: 3 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5743 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 5, 1993) Truman Tolefree and Mark Webre were present representing the City Parks and Recreation Department. Dana Carney, of the Planning staff, presented the item and outlined the several improvements proposed under this conditional use permit application. He explained that the required notice to property owners within 200 feet have been sent only to those owners of property within 200 feet of the north and east perimeter of the park as they were the ones most directly affected by the proposed improvements. The Subdivision Committee concurred that those property owners adjacent to the west and south would not be directly impacted by the proposed improvements. Staff informed the Committee that several signs advertising the upcoming Planning Commission meeting had been posted around the property and that the required legal ad had been placed in the newspaper. Discussion quickly turned to the outfield wall and its impact on nearby residences. Mr. Tolefree stated that the City Parks Department had an agreement with UALR that allows UALR to make improvements to the baseball field, but that the outfield wall went beyond the spirit of that agreement. Mr. Tolefree stated that many neighborhood residents had expressed concern over the loss of vision of the park and open space caused by the construction of the wall. He further stated that the City Parks Department was meeting with residents and representatives of UALR to resolve the wall issue. Mark Webre then presented sketches of several alternatives which are currently being discussed. He stated that it was the Parks Department's desire to have this issue resolved prior to the October 19, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. The Committee determined that there were no other outstanding issues concerning the other proposed improvements and forwarded this item to the full Commission for final resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was not present. (OCTOBER 19, 1993) There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had written requesting that this item be deferred until the November 16, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. 3 r ') P October 19, 1993 ITEM NO • 3 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5743 As part of the Consent Agenda, this item was deferred to the November 16, 1993 Commission meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 open position. 4 0 0 w ry w 0 z 0 0 (D Z Z 441,CL 111111111111 mill soon lemon t t NINONIII INI'm Nilson me oil in oneMill son Iin solosi�EMINE sonEllin t oilNINE, son III11111111 D 001 :. U) co �I Z w C0 co �I w Z w Q mill soon lemon t t NINONIII INI'm Nilson me oil in oneMill son Iin solosi�EMINE sonEllin oilNINE, son III11111111 :. U) co �I Z w C0 co �I w Z w Q October 19, 1993 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 2:50 p.m. Date I � �3 e z Cai an