HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_11 30 1993LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
REZONING HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
NOVEMBER 30,1993
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 October 19,1993 meeting were approved
as mailed.(Kathleen Oleson abstained)
III.Members Present:Brad Walker
Ramsay Ball
Diane Chachere
John McDaniel
Jerilyn Nicholson
Kathleen OlesonBillPutnam
Jim VonTungeln
Emmett Willis,Jr.(arrived after
the roll call)
Members Absent:Joe Selz
(One Open Position)
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
t I
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
REZONING HEARING
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 30,1993
I.DEFERRED ITEM
A.Z-5686 4807 Ballinger R-2 to PRD
B.Z-3844-B Fairview and Pleasant Ridge MF-6 and R-2 to 0-3
C.Z-5726 Peach Tree Drive R-2 to 0-3
D.Z-4172-A West 44th and Western Hills MF-18 and 0-2
to I-2
ED Woodcreek Village Long-form PCD (Z-5755)
II.REZ ING ITEMS
1.Z-4464-B Chenal ParkwaY and R-2 to C-3
Autumn Road
2.Z-4645-B 5705 Patterson Road I-2 to I-3
3.Z-5758 Pride ValleY and Kanis Road R-2 to C-3
4.Z-5759 4023 Baseline Road R-2 to 0-3
5.Z-5761 Mabelvale Pike (at I-30)R-2 to C-3
III.THER MATTER
6.Rick's LP Gas C.U.P.—Located at 5705 Patterson Road
(Z-4645-C)
7.Candlewood III Subdivision Replat —Located North and WestoffRivercrestDriveattheWestendofMarinaDrive
(S-548-E)
8.1994 Calendar
I
November 30,1993
ITEM 0 :A Z-
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
URROUNDING 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
TAFF ANALY IS
4807 Ballinger Road is occupied by a single family residence
and the owner would like to convert the building to four orfiveunits.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 therear3/4 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 severaltractstotheeastthatarezonedR-5 and two of them appeartobeundeveloped.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 andindustrial.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 planisapproximately1/4 mile to south.It is our position that
November 30,1993
ITEM ~A Z-86 C n
the recommended land use pattern should be maintained by not
approving the proposed R-5 reclassification.Endorsing theR-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.Alargenumberofunitsonthepropertycouldcreatean
undesirable living environment,and impact the livability of
the entire neighborhood.
L D E PL 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
amendments
ENGINEERING COMME TS
There are none to be reported.
STAFF RECOMMENDATI N
Staff recommends denial of the R-5 rezoning request.
PL I MMI I A TI (JUNE 15,1993)
Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to bedeferredbecausetheapplicantdidnotnotifytheproperty
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'
I MMI SI N A TION:(JULY 27,1993)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had
requested a deferral to October 19,1993 hearing.As partoftheConsentAgenda,the Commission voted to defer theissuetoOctober19,1993.The vote was 7 ayes,0 nays and
4 absent.
2
I
November 30,1993
ITEM A Z-n
P I MMI I A TI (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 multifamilyreclassificationofthesite.
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 zonedformultifamilyuse.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'e then reminded the
Commission that Butler Road was located in the generalvicinity.
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.
P I MMI I ACTI (NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The applicant,Ike Uketui,was not present.There were no
objectors in attendance.Staff recommended that the item be
deferred.
As part of the Consent Agenda,the Planning Commission voted
to defer the issue to the January 11,1994 hearing.The
vote was 9 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and 1 open position.
3
November 30,1993
ITEM B Z-44-B
Owner:Gerald K.and Jaquetta Johnson
Applicant:J.E.Hathaway,Jr.
Location:Fairview Road and Pleasant
Ridge Road
Request:Rezone from MF-6 and R-2 to0-3
Purpose:Office Development
Size:2.24 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
SURROU DI LAND USE AND ZONIN
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
TAFF ALY I
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's of this
writing,no specific use or user has been identified.Theentiresiteisvacantandwooded.
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 Sealsfacility.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't 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.
November 30,1993
ITEM 'Z-844-B n
The River Mountain District Plan identifies the site as partofasinglefamilyarea.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.Infact,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,whichisdirectlytothewest'taff views the area north of
Pleasant Ridge as best suited for residential development
and cannot support the 0-3 request.
L D U E 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.
E QINEERINQ COMMENT
The existing right-of-way for Fairview is deficient and
dedication of additional right-of-way is needed.
TAFF REC MMENDATI N
Staff recommends denial of the 0-3 rezoning request.
PL I MMI SION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 7,1993)
Staff reported that the applicant had submitted a requestforadeferral.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.
P I Q MMI I A TI (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.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM 'Z-44-B n
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.
P I MMI I A TI N:(NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The applicant,Jim Hathaway,was present.There were no
objectors.Mr.Hathaway spoke and distributed some
materials to the Planning Commission.He discussed the
request and then described the existing uses and development
in the area.Mr.Hathaway said the development would be low
density and that the applicant has agreed to add certain
conditions to the rezoning ordinance.Mr.Hathaway informed
the Commission that there was no user for the property.He
then went on to list the conditions and they were:
1.A building height restriction of 24 feet or two-
story.
2.Maximum lot coverage of 25%.
3.No curb cut on Fairview;2 curb cuts on Pleasant
Ridge Road.
4.A 20 foot wide landscaped buffer along the
Fairview Road frontage.
5.A 15 foot wide buffer on the south,east and a
portion of the north boundaries.
Mr.Hathaway continued by saying the curb cut restriction on
Fairview should address some of the concerns raised by the
residents of the Cedar Branch Subdivision.He then asked
for approval of the 0-3 with conditions and said office was
a logical use because of the existing land use.
Staff then addressed the Commission and indicated support
for the 0-3 rezoning.Staff said they were satisfied with
the conditions,especially with the addition of a 15 feet
buffer on the south,along Pleasant Ridge.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the 0-3 with the
listed conditions.
3
November 30,1993
ITEM B Z-44-B n
There was some discussion prior to the vote.Comments were
made about limiting certain 0-3 conditional uses and site
plans.It was pointed out that any conditional use in 0-3
would have to be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission.
The vote on the motion was 8 ayes,0 nays,1 absent,
1 abstention and 1 open position.
4
I
November 30,1993
I EM Z-726
Owner:D.B.Davis Corporation
Applicant:J.E.Hathaway,Jr.
Location:Peach Tree Drive
Request:Rezone from R-2 to 0-3
Purpose:Office
Size:0.74 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
I G E AND IN
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
TAF ALY
The site on Peach Tree Drive is currently zoned R-2,and the
request is to rezone the location to 0-3 for future officeuse.The property is situated at the entrance to the
Sandpiper SuMivision and is adjacent to I-430.In fact,aportionofthetractwastakenforuseasright-of-way forI-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 PeachTreeDrive.Land use is primarily single family and the
Koger Office Development.At the corner of Hickory Hill andPeachTreeisthelocationofthesuMivision's recreationalarea.There is undeveloped land throughout the area,especially to the west of Centerview Drive.
Because of the property's location and other factors,itdoesappearthatthesitehassomepotentialforlimitednonresidentialdevelopment.However,it is questionable
whether 0-3 is the best zoning approach for the site.Thelothasa40footplattedbuildingline,and because of averyshallowlotdepth,the addition of the 15 foot rear
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-72 n
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)issensitivetotheresidentiallotslocateddirectlyto thewest.
L E PLAN ELEME T
The adopted plan in the I-430 District recommends either nouseoroffice.Any office use should be carefully designedtominimizeanynegativeimpactstoadjacentsinglefamily.
E INEERI C MMENTS
There are none to be reported.
TAFF RE MME DATIO
Staff recommends denial of the 0-3 rezoning and suggeststhatthePODprocessbeutilizedfortheproperty.
PL I G OMMI ION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 7,1993)
Staff reported that the applicant had requested that theitembedeferred.There were two objectors present,andtherewasabriefdiscussionaboutdeferringtheissue.TheitemwasplacedontheConsentAgendaanddeferredtotheOctober19,1993 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 deferralprovisioninthebylawsrequiringawrittenrequestfive
working days prior to the meeting.)
PL I G MMI IO A TION:(OCTOBER 19,1993)
Staff told the Commission that the applicant had submitted awrittenrequestforadeferral,however,it was not receivedatleastfiveworkingdayspriortothehearing.After somediscussion,the item was placed on the Consent Agenda anddeferredtotheNovember30,1993 meeting.The vote was
9 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and 1 open position.(TheCommission's action also waived the Bylaw provision forrequestingadeferral.)
2
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-72 n
P I MMI I N ACTION:(NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The applicant,Jim Hathaway,was present.There were two
objectors in attendance.Mr.Hathaway distributed some
materials to the Planning Commission and then proceeded to
describe the area and reviewed the written information.
Mr.Hathaway then presented two conceptual plans and
described the proposed development as low density with
maximum buffers.He said the plans were very similar,but
there were some minor variations in each plan.Mr.Hathaway
described the site and said that the maximum size of the
building would probably be 8,000 square feet.He then
proceeded to review four conditions that would be included
in the ordinance and they were:
1.To create a 20 foot wide naturally landscaped
buffer on the western side of the lot.
2.Maximum lot coverage not to exceed 25~os
3.Building height not to exceed two-story.
4.To create a landscaped buffer area with a minimum
depth of 10 feet along Peach Tree Drive,except
for two curb cuts.
Jim Magnus,a resident of the neighborhood,then addressed
the Commission.Mr.Magnus submitted a petition and said,
the residents were opposed to the office rezoning.He said
there were potential traffic problems due to limited
visibility and a hill.Mr.Magnus also said the location of
the subdivision pool was a concern.He continued his
presentation by describing the environs and said the
rezoning would not help the neighborhood.Mr.Magnus
reminded the Commission that the plans were just concepts
and not part of the request before them.He said there were
approximately 115 names on the petition opposed to the
rezoning from single family to office.Mr.Magnus told the
Commission that no meetings have taken place between the
neighborhood and Mr.Hathaway.Mr.Magnus made some
additional comments and said he would prefer a POD.
Ron Newman,Planning staff,discussed the plan for the area.
Jim Lawson,Director of Neighborhoods and Planning,offered
some comments and said the staff was in support of the 0-3
rezoning with the proposed conditions.
Reginald Wilson,representing the Sandpiper Property Owners
Association,said the group was strongly opposed to the
office rezoning.Mr.Wilson said the subdivision has only
3
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-72 C nt.
two entrances and an office use would create traffic
problems.He said the property acts as an entry for the
neighborhood.Mr.Magnus went on to say that the site plan
did not address the possible traffic problems and made other
comments.
Jim Magnus spoke again and discussed the Koger development.
He made some comments about the site and said additional
review of a plan would be appropriate.
Jim Hathaway told the Commission that he did attempt to
meet with the neighbors/property owners association.
Mr.Hathaway reviewed the site plans and said the property
was about a block away from the crest of the hill.He said
the proposed conditions would ensure a compatible
development and they would be included in the ordinance and
run with the land.Mr.Hathaway then asked for a vote to
rezone the site to 0-3.He then said the amount of
additional traffic would be minimal and reminded the
Commission that Peach Tree Drive was a collector.
There was some discussion about 0-2 for the property.
Mr.Hathaway said the owner would accept 0-2.
A motion was made to recommended approval of 0-2 as amended.
The motion failed to receive a second.
Discussion continued on a number of items,including
deferring the issue.
Jim Hathaway said that he would be willing to defer the
item.
A motion was made to defer the 0-3 rezoning request.
Comments were offered by a number of individuals.
Jim Magnus said deferrals tend to create problems and asked
the Commission to deny the 0-3 request.
Reginald Wilson said that he saw no problems with deferring
the item.
The Commission then voted on the deferral motion.The vote
was 6 ayes,2 nays,1 absent,1 abstention (Brad Walker)
and 1 open position.The item was deferred to the
January 11,1994 hearing.
4
November 30,1993
ITEM 'Z-4172 A
Owner:Atley G.Davis
Applicant:Atley G.Davis
Location:West 44th Street and Western
Hills Avenue
Request:Rezone from MF-18 and 0-2
to I-2
Purpose:Industrial (Equipment Storage)
Size:1.3 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
RRO NDING LAND U E AND ZO ING
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
TAFF ALY I
The property in question is situated at the northwest cornerofWesternHillsandWest44th,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.Atthistime,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 issimilartothezoningandismadeupofsinglefamily,
commercial,industrial,schools,post office,a church
and a golf course.The area south of West 44th is awell-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 combinationofcommercialandindustrialuses.There are also some
undeveloped tracts and vacant buildings in the area.
November 30,1993
ITEM .:D Z-4172-A n
A rezoning of the site under consideration to I-2 is inconflictwiththeadoptedplanandstaffcannotsupport anindustrialreclassificationfortheproperty.The existingMF-18 and 0-2 zoning provides a good transition between theI-2 zoning to the north and the R-2 neighborhood south of
West 44th Street.Extending industrial zoning to West 44thStreetcouldhaveanadverseimpactonthenearbyresidentiallotsandcouldalsoestablishundesirable
precedent for the area.The existing zoning pattern and
land use concept are working,and should be maintained bynotendorsingtherequestedrezoning.Another concern is
West 44th,which is a substandard street,and cannot handleindustrialtypetraffic.
LAND U E PLAN ELEMENT
The site in question is in the Boyle Park District.Therequestisinconflictwiththeadoptedplanwhichcalls forsinglefamily.Since there is existing single family acrossthestreetandtheconditionshavenotchanged,there is noreasontoamendtheplanforahigheruse.
EN INEERI C MME T
Western Hills is classified as a collector.The right-of-waystandardis30feetfromthecenterline.Dedication ofadditionalright-of-way will be required because the existingright-of-way is deficient.
TAFF RE OMME DATION
Staff recommends denial of the I-2 rezoning request.
P I G COMMI ION ACTI (OCTOBER 19,1993)
The applicant,Atley Davis,was present.There were noobjectors.Mr.Davis spoke and gave some history on thesite.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 thebufferrequirementalongWest44thandsaidthemaximum
would be 20 feet.Mr.Brown also said that a fence would berequired.
2
l
November 30,1993
ITEM D 2-4172-A n
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.
P I MMI SION A TION:(NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The applicant,Atley Davis,was present.There were no
objectors in attendance.
Staff presented the item and said the request had been
amended to a PID.Staff then reviewed the engineering
comments and they included a sidewalk on Western Hills;
Master Street Plan improvements on West 44th;detention and
excavation ordinance would apply;and dedication of
additional right-of-way on Western Hills.
Atley Davis spoke and discussed the engineering
requirements.Mr.Davis said he did not have a problem with
the dedication of right-of-way,but did object to the street
improvements.Mr.Davis offered some additional comments.
A motion was then made to recommend approval of the PID
subject to satisfying the engineering comments.The motion
passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open
position.
3
November 30,1993
ITEM N .:E FILE O.:Z-7 5
NAME:WOODCREEK VILLAGE --LONG-FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
~L /AT~I g:North of West Markham Street and south of Mara Lynn
Road,approximately 0.1 mile west of Bowman Road
ENGINEER:
J'IM MOSES/PEAK DEVELOPMENT MCGETRICK ENGINEERING
225 E.Markham St.11225 Huron LaneLittleRock,AR 72201 Lit t le Rock,AR 72211
376-6555 223-9900
AREA:42.24 ACRES BER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW TREET:0
~Z ~IN :MF-12 &C-2 PR POSED USES:Commercial Shopping Center
PL ING DI TRICT:2 &19
VARIANCES RE VESTED:None
STATEMENT F PR POSAL:
The applicant proposes a Planned Commercial Development District
in order to construct a shopping center development.In additiontothe249,375 square foot shopping center building and accessory
parking for 1,296 vehicles,as well as an 8000 square foot
building and parking for 148 vehicles on an out-parcel,the
development is proposed to include construction of an urban park.
The construction of the park and facilities is proposed to be
funded by the developer,with input and future management by theCity.The use of the out-parcel is proposed to be restricted to
a use compatible with the park.Parking for the shopping centerisproposedtobeavailableforthepublicutilizingthepark.
A.PR P AL RE VEST:
Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the BoardofDirectorsisrequestedforaPCDfortheWoodCreek
Development.The applicant requests approval for
development of a 42.24-acre site to include a shoppingcenterandconcomitantparking,an out-parcel for a use
which will be compatible with the park use,and a City parkfacilitytoincludeaboardwalk,pavilion,amphitheater,and
improvements to Rock Creek.The request includes a shoppingcenterbuildingof249,375 square feet and its parking of1,296 vehicles,plus an 8000 square foot building and a
parking lot for 148 vehicles.
November 30,1993
ITEM .~E on in FILE NO.:Z-7
B.EXI TI DITI N
The site is currently undeveloped and contains City-owned
land through which Rock Creek flows.The site is presently
zoned MF-12,with a small C-2 area at the south-west corneroftheacreage.The site is heavily wooded and the
topography rises from an elevation of approximately 410 feet
along West Markham and Rock Creek to 540 feet along Mara
Lynn,a difference of 130 feet.
C.EN I EERING UTILITY MMENTS:
Engineering indicates that a study needs to be provided for
the floodplain modification anticipated.Further,a grading
plan and excavation plan and a traffic impact analysis needtobeprovided.Engineering indicates that construction of
a right turn lane on Markham Street/Bowman Street will be
required.Mara Lynn must be constructed to Master Street
Plan requirements.
Water Works reports that on-site fire protection will be
required.
Wastewater reports that there is a sewer main outfall
located on the property,and that Wastewater should be
contacted for details.
Arkansas Power &Light will require easements.
ARKLA Gas approved the submittal without comment.
Southwestern Bell approved the submittal without comment.
The Fire Department approved the street and topography only.
Parks and Recreation will require coordination with that
department in this development on the rechannelization of
Rock Creek and on the development of the park site.
Site Plan Review reports that the southern parking lot
should be moved northward out of the required 40 foot wide
buffer along Markham Street.
D.I E LE AL TECHNICAL DE I N:
A preliminary Bill of Assurance is to be provided.
The project narrative needs to be more specific on the typesofusesproposedfortheshoppingcenterandfortheout-
parcel,as well as specify any convertibility requested.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM 'n in ed FILE N .Z-75
The plan/plat needs to show the zoning classifications of
the site and of the abutting properties.A storm drainageanalysis,with typical ditch sections,is to be provided.
The source of title is to be furnished.
A schematic landscaping plan is required.The proposed
treatment of the perimeter of the property is to be
addressed.The buffer requirement along the north propertylineistobeaddressed.
E .MLA~LY'LII
The Chenal District Plan currently shows the site as Low
Density Multi-family north of Rock Creek and Park/Open Space
south of the creek.Although the proposal is not consistent
with the adopted plan,the proposed development is unique,in that it represents a publichprivate attempt to mix a
commercial development with an urban park.It is the
opinion of the planning staff,that the proposed
commercial/park mix would complement the area,provided thatitbedonewithappropriatedesignconsiderations,which
would include signage,landscaping and significant
buffering,particularly on the Bowman Road frontage.The
parking lot,in particular,should be designed to besensitivetotheparkandthecreekfrontage.
Several critical issues remain unresolved,or there is
incomplete information available to complete the staff
review.Engineering has not received the needed floodplain
study or traffic analysis.Parks and Recreation has not
reviewed the development plan for the Rock Creek
channelization and has not approved the development plan for
the park.These items are critical in arriving at a
recommendation to the Commission.
F.TAFF RECOMME DATI N
Staff recommends deferral of this item until complete
documentation and submittals for the application arereceived.
BDIVI I MMITTEE MME T:(October 28,1993)
Mr.Jim Moses,the applicant,and Mr.Pat McGetrick,the
engineer,were present.Staff presented the request,and
Mr.Moses and Mr.McGetrick discussed the proposal with the
Committee and staff.Mr.McGetrick presented additional drawings
needed to complete the application requirements.The proposed
3
November 30,1993
ITEM:E nine FILE .2-7 5
uses for the shopping center and for the park were discussed.The discussion outline was reviewed.Conflict with the Land UsePlanwasdiscussed.The item was then forwarded to theCommissionforthepublichearing.
P I MMI I A TI (NOVEMBER 16,1993)
Staff reported that the applicant had submitted a written requestaskingthatthehearingofthisissuebedeferreduntilthePlanningCommissionmeetingofNovember30,1993.AdditionaltimeneededtobegainedinordertocompletedesignworkandobtainapprovalsfromParksandEngineering.The item wasincludedintheConsentAgendaforapprovalandwasapproved by avoteof8ayes,no nays,0 abstentions,2 absent and 1 openposition.
P I C MMI ION ACTIO (NOVEMBER 30,1993)
Neighborhoods and Planning Director,Jim Lawson,introduced theitem.He indicated that the applicant's proposal was complex andinvolvedconcernsofnotonlyPlanning,but Parks andEngineering,and that staff's approval was based on conditionsbeingmetwhichaddressedtheseconcerns.Mr.Lawson indicatedthattheapplicantneededtomakeafullpresentationtooutlinetheproposal,the nature of the concerns,and the manner in whichtheconcernshadbeenaddressed.
Mr.Jim Moses,of Moses and Nosari Real Estate,on behalf of PeakDevelopment,presented the proposal.He reported that theproposalinvolvedconstructionofastrip-type shopping centercontainingapproximately250,000 square feet,construction of an8,000 square foot building on the one out-parcel shown on theplan,and construction of a major public park.The parkdevelopmentwouldbeundertakensimultaneouslywiththedevelopmentoftheshoppingcenter,and would be constructed attheexpenseofthedeveloper.Rock Creek,he indicated,would beimprovedinamannerthatwouldbothflowappropriately,yet notbeaconcreteflume;it would be a natural looking creek bed withwaterfallsandadetentionpond.Included in the proposal wouldbeanannualcontributionbythedeveloperfora25-year timeperiodforassistanceinmaintenanceofthepark.Mr.Mosesreportedthattheproposedsiteisattheeasternedgeofa 40 to50acresitecurrentlyownedbytheCity,and the development oftheparkasapartoftheproposeddevelopmentcouldbeabeginningofthedevelopmentofamajorpublicparkextendingtothewest.
Mr.Moses presented to Commissioners a copy of correspondenceaddressedtoMarkWebreoftheParksDepartmentandcommented onitscontents.It indicates that the developer will make an
4
November 30,1993
ITEM .E on in FILE .'-75
annual contribution to the Parks Department for upkeep of theparkatWoodcreekVillageof$7,500.The maintenance amountwouldbeleviedagainstthepropertyintheformofanannualassessmentthatwouldterminatein25years.The developer,itindicates,will construct park improvements in the amount of
$625,000.This is beyond the costs of basic excavation,fill,the creek channel work,the bridge structure,and design feesnotexceeding6wofthecost.It includes the costs forearth-forming for berms,the amphitheater,etc.;landscaping;sidewalks;a footbridge;bikepaths;pavilion(s);lighting,signage;irrigation and other plumbing;and,facades for bridgesandthecreekchannel.
Mr.Moses indicated that Parks had been closely involved in theplanningfortheparkandthepreparationofthebudgetforitsconstructionand
maintenance'r.
Moses responded to staff's request for information on theproposeduseoftheout-parcel.He indicated that the use wasnotidentified,but that he requested approval for all C-3 usesfortheout-parcel.
Mr.Moses outlined the signage request for the PCD.He proposedonemajorpylonsignwhichwouldbea450squarefootsign,36feetinheight,to be located approximately 200 feet north of
Markham.One small ground mounted monument sign on Markham nottoexceed4feetinheightand8feetinwidth.One ground
mounted monument sign on Napa Valley Road not to exceed 4 feet inheightand8feetinwidth.One pole-mounted sign for theout-parcel not to exceed 160 square feet in area an 36 feet inheight.Additionally,he requested all wall,mansard,awning,under-canopy,projecting,and incidental signs allowed byOrdinanceforcommercialzones.
Engineering and Parks staff indicated concurrence with theproposal.Commissioners indicated enthusiastic approval andappreciationforthedeveloper's proposal.Ruth Bell,representing the League of Women's Voters of Pulaski CountyindicatedpleasurethattheconcernsofEngineeringandParks hadbeenaddressedandindicatedpleasurewiththeproposal.
A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the PCDtotheBoardofDirectors.The motion carried with a vote of
7 ayes,no nays,2 absent,1 abstention (Commissioner Ball),and1openposition.
5
November 30,1993
ITEM 1 Z-4464-B
Owner:David A.Pickering,Joe D.White,
and David A.Pickering,Jr.
Applicant:Joe D.White
Location:Chenal Parkway and Autumn Road
Request:Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Purpose:Commercial
Size:2.37 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
RROUND NG LAND USE AND ZO NG
North —Vacant and Single-Family,zoned R-2
South —Commercial,zoned PCD
East —Vacant,zoned C-3
West —Vacant,zoned R-2
TAFF ALY I
This item involves a 2.4 acre tract of land located at thenorthwestcorneroftheChenalParkwayandAutumnRoad.TherequestistorezonethesitefromR-2 to C-3 for futurecommercialdevelopment.The property is vacant and has 415feetoffrontageonAutumnRoadandapproximately333feetontheChenalParkway.(This acreage is part of theproposedLowe's site.)
In 1990,a C-3 request was filed for the same piece ofproperty.During the Planning Commission public hearing,the application was amended to C-2,and the Commission votedtoendorsetheC-2 reclassification.The item was withdrawnbeforeitwasconsideredbytheBoardofDirectors.At thattime,staff had some concerns about a commercialreclassifcationatthecorner.
Zoning in the general vicinity is R-2,0-2,C-1,C-3,POD,
PCD and OS.The northeast and southeast corners of the
Autumn/Chenal Parkway intersection are zoned C-3.It shouldbepointedthatsomeoftheC-3 zoning,at the intersection,
was accomplished through a court decree,as part of anannexationlawsuit.Land use includes single family,achurchandaspecializedhospital.At this time,there aretwomajornonresidentialprojectsunderconstructioninthegeneralarea.They are the Home Quarters development on thesouthsideoftheChenalParkwayandanoffice/mini-storage
November 30,1993
ITEM NO.~1 Z-44 4-B on
units,south of the Home Quarters site.There is also
vacant land found throughout the area,including the C-3,
directly across Autumn Road.
The adopted land use plan,I-430,shows the property in
question as mixed office and commercial.Therefore,some
type of nonresidential reclassification is a reasonable
option for the site.The plan also identifies the northeast
corner of the Chenal Parkway and Bowman for mixed office and
commercial development.For the remainder of the area north
of the parkway,the plan recommends office use.
Due to the amount of large scaled development,staff feels
that there is a need for smaller commercial sites along the
parkway to accommodate users that do not require 10-acre or
larger sites.(The C-3 site at the southeast corner of
Autumn and the Chenal Parkway is occupied by a hospital.)
Based on the land use and zoning patterns in the area,staff
feels that the site under consideration is an appropriate
location for a small commercial development.The proposed
C-3 would basically duplicate the C-3 land on the east side
of Autumn.Also,the proposed C-3 rezoning should not have
a negative impact on the residential areas because the siteissomewhatremovedfromtheestablishedsinglefamily
neighborhoods.Staff is recommending a plan amendment for a
number of the properties that have frontage on the parkway.
LAND USE PL ELEMENT
The site is in the I-430 Planning District.The plan for
the area recommends mixed office commercial.Since much of
the recommended "mixed"use areas are zoned and/or developed
commercially,staff recommends the plan be changed to
reflect the City's action.To this end the southwest and
southeast corners of the Chenal-Bowman intersection would be
commercial.The mixed office commercial located at
Bowman-Chenal (northeast corner)and Autumn-Chenal
(northwest corner)should also be commercial.This is the
third amendment in this location within a year.The
Commission might consider in the future deferring any
rezoning in conflict with the plan (major change)so that
the entire area can be reviewed and then stick with the
adopted plan for a minimum time period before relooking at
the area.
E I EERI G MME TS
Dedication of additional right-of-way will be required if the
Autumn Road right-of-way does not equal 30 feet from the
centerline,and Chenal Parkway does not have a right-of-way
of 60 feet from the centerline.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM 1 Z-44 -B n
P RE MME DATI
Staff recommends approval of the C-3 rezoning as requested.
P I MMI I A TI (NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The applicant was represented by Hal Kemp,an attorney.
There were two objectors in attendance.Mr.Kemp spokebrieflyanddiscussedtherequest.He said the owners were
in support of the staff's position.
Doyle Daniel,a resident of the Birchwood Subdivision and
vice-president of the neighborhood association,then
addressed the Commission.Mr.Daniel said that the
neighborhood was not in support of the C-3 and the residents
would prefer a PCD.He went on to say that the neighborhood
would like to know what the proposed use was,as part of a
PCD request.Mr.Daniel then presented a zoning map and
described the area.He said there were only three entrances
into Birchwood and traffic was a problem.
Mr.Daniel reminded the Commission that Autumn Road was a
major access point for the neighborhood.He then voiced
some concerns about drainage.Mr.Daniel concluded by
saying that the Birchwood Neighborhood Association voted
against the C-3 rezoning.
Kenneth Davis,another resident of Birchwood,spoke against
the C-3 request.Mr.Davis said that a PCD was more
appropriate.He told the Commission that the neighborhood
association voted to oppose the C-3 and the rezoning should
be done as a PCD.
Hal Kemp responded to some of the residents'omments and
said not every rezoning needs to be a PCD.Mr.Rcmp said
the C-3 was a sound rezoning and asked for the Commission's
vote.
There was some discussion about various issues.
Tad Borkowski,Engineering staff,addressed several
engineering questions.
Doyle Daniel made some additional comments about Autumn Road
and said he was concerned with all the uses allowed in C-3.
Kenneth Davis spoke and responded to comments made by thestaff.
3
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-44 4-B n
Jim Lawson,Director of Neighborhoods and Planning,said the
owner was willing to make a 254 in-lieu contribution towards
a traffic signal at the Chenal Parkway/Autumn Roadintersection.
Joe White,discussed the Chenal Parkway design and driveways
on the Parkway.Mr.white said that road improvements would
be required when the properties were developed.
Ruth Bell,League of Women Voters,spoke and asked some
questions about future rezoning requests in the area.
Jim Lawson responded to Ms.Bell's inquiries.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the C-3 rezoning
with the condition that a 25+in-lieu contribution be made
towards a traffic signal at the Autumn Road/Chenal Parkwayintersection.(The application was amended to include thecondition.)The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,1 nay,
2 absent and 1 open position.
4
November 30,1993
ITEM :2 Z-4 4 -B
Owner:Worthen National Bank
Applicant:Worthen National Bank by
Mark Buerkle
Location:5705 Patterson Road
Request:Rezone from I-2 to I-3
Purpose:Propane Bulk Storage
Size:5.01 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
R DI LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Industrial,zoned I-2
South —Vacant,zoned I-2
East —Vacant,zoned I-2
West —Mixed,zoned I-2
STAFF ANALYSIS
5705 Patterson Road is currently zoned I-2,and the requestisrezonetheacreagetoI-3.At this time,the proposed
use is propane bulk storage.In the I-3,"bulk storage of
highly flammable and/or hazardous materials"is permitted if
the locations meet the following criteria:
~The site is larger than 5 acres.
~The location is separated from residential zoned or
used property by at least 1,000 feet,property line to
property line.
~The storage facilities have a minimum setback of
200 feet from all property lines.
If a tract cannot meet one of the criteria,then the storage
use is listed as a conditional use.The property in
question has 5 acres,however,it is less than 1,000 feet
from R-2 land and a conditional use permit is required inadditiontotheI-3 rezoning.(Item No.6 on this agenda is
the requested conditional use permit.)
The site is vacant at this time.The frontage on Patterson
equals 200 feet and the tract has a depth of approximately
760 feet.Along the rear of the 5 acres is a railroad
right-of-way.
November 30,1993
ITEM 2 Z-4 4 -B n
Zoning is R-2,R-5,C-4 and I-2.The property under
consideration is surrounded by I-2 land.The nearest R-2 is
several hundred feet to the west,along Hoffman Road,and to
the north.Land use is primarily nonresidential and
includes office,some commercial,auto service and
industrial.There are also some residential uses in the
general vicinity and some land is still undeveloped.
Because of the existing zoning and land use patterns,it
appears that the requested I-3 is an acceptable
reclassification for the site.The use and rezoning should
not create any problems for the nearby properties,nor have
a direct impact on the established single family
neighborhoods because they are some distance from the site.
And finally,the adopted plan does show the property as part
of a large industrial area,and not as light industrial.
D E PLAN ELEME T
The site is in the 65th Street East District.The plan for
the area recommends industrial use.There are no plan
issues.
E I ERI MME T
Patterson Road is a collector and the right-of-way standardis30feetfromthecenterline.If the existing
right-of-way is deficient,dedication of additional
right-of-way will be required.
TAFF RE MME ATIO
Staff recommends approval of the I-3 rezoning request.
P I MMI I A TI N:(NOVEMBER 30,1993)
(Item No.2 and No.6 were discussed together.)
The applicant,Mark Buerkle,was present.There was one
other interested person in attendance.Mr.Buerkle made a
few brief comments.
Charley Stetson,a nearby property owner,asked a question,
but did not object to the I-3 rezoning.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the I-3 request.
The vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position to
approve the motion.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-57
Owner:J.D.Pride
Applicant:John Spann
Location:Pride Valley and Kanis Road
Request:Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Purpose:Mini-Warehouse Units
Size:5.01 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
S RR NDING LAND E D ZONING
North —Vacant and Office,zoned R-2 and O-2
South —Vacant,zoned R-2
East —Vacant,zoned R-2
West —Vacant and Single-Family,zoned R-2
STAFF ANALY I
The property in question is in the general vicinity of thePrideValleyandKanisintersection,and the request is torezonethe5acresfromR-2 to C-3.The land is situatedapproximately720feetwestofKanisRoadandisoutside thecitylimits.The proposal is to develop the land formini-warehouse units.If the site is reclassified to C-3,aconditionalusepermitwillstillberequiredforthestorageunitsbecausetheyarenotabyrightuseintheC-3district.The property has 327 feet of frontage on PrideValleyand133feetonKanisRoad.
Zoning in the general area is R-2,0-2 and PCD.The 0-2 is
found along the north and east sides of Kanis Road and the
PCD is at the corner of Kanis Road and the Chenal Parkway.
The site under consideration is surrounded by R-2 land.
Land use includes single family,commercial,offices forKincoConstructionandBakerElementarySchool.Arelativelyhighpercentageoflandisstillundeveloped.
The Ellis Mountain plan shows property for low densitymultifamilyuseandnotforthenonresidentialdevelopment.Planning efforts and other plans done for this area haveneveridentifiedthissiteforcommercialuses.It is thestaff's position that the property is not a viable C-3location,and there is no strong justification for creating
November 30,1993
ITEM 2-7 n
a new commercial area through this request.The plan
recommends certain sites along the Chenal Parkway for
commercial development and the land use plan's direction
should be reinforced by not endorsing the C-3 request for
the five acres.Because of the area and location,a C-3
reclassification could have an adverse impact on the nearby
residential properties.
L E PL ELEME T
The site is in the Ellis Mountain District.The plan for
the area recommends low density residential.There have not
been changes in the area to justify a major change in the
plan such as this.(Note:This would be another area of
higher density residential lost,making even the existing
amounts of commercial less justified.)
E INEERI OMMENT
There are none to be reported.
TAFF RE OMME DATI
Staff recommends denial of the C-3 rezoning.
P I MMI IO A TI (NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The application was represented by Meredith Spann.There
were three objectors in attendance.Ms.Spann addressed the
request and said there was a need for mini-storage units.
She described the area and major nonresidential users,One
Source and Kinco.Ms.Spann made some additional comments
and said the rezoning would not create problems for the
neighborhood.
Jennipher Boone,a resident on Pride Valley,said there
would be problems with traffic and a commercial development
would harm the rural character of the area.Ms.Boone then
asked the Commission to deny the C-3.
Bill Worthen,a property owner,said he was opposed to the
C-3.
Meredith Spann offered some comments and said the proposed
development would be done in two stages.
Bob Brown,Plans Specialist,discussed landscaping and
buffering.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-7 n
Ray Robbins,property owner to the west,opposed the C-3
rezoning.Mr.Robbins discussed the area and property
values.He said C-3 allows a large number of uses.
Mr.Robbins described the proposal as a window into aresidentialareaandsaidtheneighborhoodwouldbeimpacted
by traffic.Mr.Robbins said the neighborhood was a quiet
R-2 area and asked for a vote against the proposed C-3
encroachment.
Meredith Spann offered some additional comments and askedfortheCommissiontovoteinsupportofC-3.
Peggy Robbins asked some questions about the development.
There was some additional discussion and the request was
amended to include a condition that there would be no access
to Pride Valley.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the C-3 rezoning
with the access restriction.The motion was denied by a
vote of 0 ayes,7 nays,3 absent and 1 open position.
3
November 30,1993
ITEM N .:4 Z-7
Owner:Donald D.Cobb
Applicant:Donald D.Cobb
Location:4023 Baseline Road
Request:Rezone from R-2 to 0-3
Purpose:Single-Family and Office
Size:0.98 acres
Existing Use:Single-Family
SURR DING LAND U E D ZONING
North —Vacant,zoned 0-3
South —Single-Family,zoned R-2
East —Single-Family,zoned R-2
West —Single-Family and Commercial,zoned R-2
TAFF ANALY I
4023 Baseline Road is zoned R-2,and the request is to
rezone the lot to 0-3.The proposal is to utilize the
property for a professional office,an accountant,and as a
single family residence.At this time,there is a house and
two accessory structures on the property.The site has
105 feet of frontage on Baseline and a depth of
approximately 410 feet.This location on Baseline is
situated between Hilaro Springs Road and Reck Road.
Zoning in the general vicinity is primarily R-2.On the
north side of Baseline,there is a C-4 site and a large area
of 0-3 and I-2.The property in question abuts R-2 on allsides.The land use is more mixed than the zoning and
includes single family,multifamily,mobile home parks,office,commercial,industrial and an elementary school.
Along this portion of Baseline,there are a number of
nonconforming uses which range from multifamily to autorepair.This is especially true for the properties west of
4023 Baseline Road.Directly to the west is a nonconforming
commercial use.
Even though the immediate area is still zoned R-2,the land
use pattern has been influenced by the amount of
nonconforming uses.Based on a wind shield survey of the
neighborhood,it appears that the residential and
nonresidential uses are co-existing and that some type ofofficereclassificationisareasonablezoningoptionfor
November 30,1993
ITEM 4 Z-7 n
the property.Because of the existing residences,
especially along Bruno Road,staff feels that 0-1 for the
north 160 feet is more appropriate for the site.In the 0-1district,both single family residences and professionalofficesarebyrightuses;0-3 does not permit single family
residences.An 0-1 rezoning will allow a minor
nonresidential intrusion into the block without impacting
the residential properties,and should not create any
precedent for future rezonings.
L D E P ELEMENT
The site is in the Geyer Springs East Planning District.
The plan recommends mixed residential.The pattern
generally is mixed residential with a few nonconforming
businesses.At this time,staff does not recommend changing
the plan.
E I EERI MME T
There are none to be reported.
TAFF RE MMENDATI
Staff recommends approval of 0-1 for a depth of 160 feet and
not 0-3 as requested.
P I MMI I A TI (NOVEMBER 30 1993)
The applicant,Don Cobb,was present.There were no
objectors.Mr.Cobb agreed with the staff's recommendation
and amended the request to 0-1 for the north 160 feet of thelot.The item was then added to the Consent Agenda.
As part of the Consent Agenda,the Planning Commission voted
to recommend approval of the amended request to 0-1.The
vote was 9 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and 1 open position.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-7 1
Owner:Ted A.Myer
Applicant:Joe D.White
Location:Mabelvale Pike (at -I-30
Interchange)
Request:Rezone from R-2 to C-3
purpose:Commercial
Size:2.48 acres
Existing Use:Single-Family
SURROUNDING L D USE AND ZO ING
North —I-30 Interchange,zoned R-2
South —Single-Family,zoned R-2
East —Vacant,zoned C-3 and I-2
West —Vacant and Single-Family,zoned R-2
TAFF ANALYSIS
The issue before the Planning Commission is to rezone a 1.7acretractonMabelvalePikefromR-2 to C-3 for an
unspecified commercial use.The property is situated at theI-30 interchange with Mabelvale Pike.Currently,there are
four single family residences and one accessory structure on
the site.The property has approximately 500 feet of street
frontage along Mabelvale Pike and the interchange
right-of-way.
The current zoning includes R-2,C-3,C-4 and I-2.The
property in question adjoins C-3 and I-2 on the east and R-2
on the other sides.Directly across Mabelvale Pike,the
zoning is R-2.There are also some C-4 and I-2 sites to thewest.On the east side of Mabelvale Pike,a large area ofI-2 does abut the street right-of-way.Land uses are made
up of single family residences,commercial and industrial.
There are also several nonconforming uses in the area and a
high percentage of the land is still undeveloped,including
the C-3 and some of the I-2.
Because of the property's location and the existing zoningtotheeast,staff feels that it is appropriate to expand
the C-3 to Mabelvale Pike.The area has already experienced
major zoning changes and increasing the amount of
nonresidential land by two acres should not cause anysignificantproblemsfortheotherproperties.Having
November 30,1993
ITEM Z-7 n
frontage on a minor arterial and being next to an interstate
interchange does lend some justification to reclassifying
the property.Should the Planning Commission endorse the
C-3 rezoning,the staff will recommend a plan amendment to
the Board of Directors.
D E P ELEME T
The site is in the Geyer Springs West District.The plan
recommends mixed residential.In the past couple of years,
there have been changes to the east,commercial development
and proposals;while to the west,mixed commercial and/or
industrial has been recommended on the plan.To reflect the
changing conditions,staff recommends the mixed office
commercial area to the east be changed to commercial and
extended west to Mabelvale Pike.An open space strip should
be added along the southern boundary of the commercial and
continued south to the existing "OS"area west of Mavis
Circle.
E I EERI MMENT
Mabelvale Pike is classified as a minor arterial and the
right-of-way standard is 45 feet from the centerline.The
existing right-of-way is deficient and dedication of
additional right-of-way will be required.
TAFF RE MME DATI
Staff recommends approval of the C-3 rezoning request.
P I 0 I I ATI (NOVEMBER 30,1993)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors,and the
item was placed on the Consent Agenda.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the C-3 rezoning.
The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and
1 open position.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM O.:FILE NO.:Z-4 45-
QAME Rick 'LP Qas-
Conditional Vse Permit
~LQAT~Ig:5705 Patterson Road
ER APPLICANT:Worthen National Bank by
Mark Buerkle,Agent
~PR PO AL:A conditional use permit is
requested to allow for the bulk
storage of propane gas on an I-3
zoned,5.01 acre tracts This itemisassociatedwithItemNo.2
(File No.Z-4645-B),a request to
rezone this site from I-2 to I-3.
RDIN E DESI N STANDARDS:
1.it Loc i n
The site is located on the east side of Patterson Road,
directly across from its intersection with Hoffman Road.
2.m ibili with N i rh
This site is located on the northern fringe of the 65th
Street Industrial District.The primary zoning in the
immediate vicinity is I-2.
Other uses in the area are primarily industrial or
commercial including an oil distribution company,a large
industrial bakery,an auto repair garage and a small strip
center containing a variety of uses including a taxi
service.
Several other manufacturing/warehousing facilities are
located in the vicinity.
The property is bounded,on the east,by a spur of the MoPac
Railroad
Linc'he
proposed use of this property will be the bulk storage
of propane gas in four above ground storage tanks;one
30,000 gallon tank,one 6,000 gallon tank and two 4,000
gallon tanks.
The proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood.
November 30,1993
ITEM n in FILE Z-4 4
3.On-i Drives n Parkin
The applicant proposes a single,15 foot wide driveway to
access the propane storage
tanks'here
is no office proposed for this site and no need for
any parking spaces.
4.re nin n Buff r
Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances
is required.A 30 foot street side buffer is required.The
Landscape Ordinance requirements apply to the front 50 feet
of the site.
5.Ci En ine r Comment
Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline on
Patterson Road.Construct one-half collector street
standard improvements to Patterson Road.Detention and
Excavation Ordinances apply.
6.ilit C mment
No comments
7.Fir D r m n Comm n
A standard fire hydrant is required near the entrance to
this property,on the east side of Patterson Road.If the
site is enclosed by a fence,the Fire Department must be
provided a key.
8.A~nl sis
This item is associated with and contingent upon Item No.2,
File No.Z-4645-B,a request to rezone this site from I-2 toI-3.
Within the I-3 zoning district,bulk storage of highly
flammable and/or hazardous materials is an allowed use onlyiflocatedontractsoflandlargerthanfiveacresinarea
separated from residentially zoned or used property by at
least 1,000 feet,property line to property line,and
providing a minimum of 200 feet of setback for storagefacilitiesfromallpropertylines.Otherwise,a
conditional use permit is required.
The proposed use does not conform to the standards set forth
above in that the subject property is within 1,000 feet of
residentially zoned or used property and the propane storage
tanks are within 120 feet of both the north and south
property lines.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM n in FILE Z-4 4 -C
Residentially zoned and/or used property is located
approximately 500 feet to the north and east of this site.
9.ff R mmn in
Staff recommends approval of this application subject to.
1.Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances
2.Compliance with the City Engineer Comments
3.Compliance with the Fire Department Comments
BDIVI I MMITTEE MMENT:(OCTOBER 28,1993)
The applicant was not present.
Dana Carney,of the Planning staff,presented the item and
explained that the conditional use permit is necessary,assuming
that the I-3 zoning is approved,because the property is within
1,000 feet of residentially zoned or used property and the
storage facilities are located less than 200 feet from property
lines.
The Committee stated that further information is needed on the
type and location of any fence and that Fire Department approval
is necessary.
It was determined that,beyond the proposal to rezone this site
to I-3,there were no other outstanding issues and the Committee
forwarded this item to the full Commission for final resolution.
P I G MMI ION ACTI N:(NOVEMBER 30,1993)
Mark Buerkle was present representing the application.There
were no objectors present.
This item was discussed with Item No.2 (File No.Z-4645-B),a
request to rezone this property from I-2 to I-3.
Dana Carney,of the Planning staff,presented the item and a
staff recommendation of approval,subject to compliance with the
comments as noted above.Mr.Carney informed the Commission that
a revised site plan had been received which gave the required
details on the fence,and that there were no other outstanding
issues.
3
November 30,1993
ITEM n in FILE N Z-4 4 -C
In response to a question from Commissioner Oleson,Mr.Carney
discussed the ordinance definition of "bulk storage of highly
flammable and/or hazardous materials",and explained why this
proposed use was required to go through the conditional use
permit process.
Mr.Carney further explained the distinctions between this
proposed use and other uses which fall within the definition and
why staff felt that this proposed use should be approved.
It was pointed out that the Pire Department had approved this
application and that the proposed use would not produce any toxic
or noxious emissions.
A motion was made to approve the application,subject to
compliance with the conditions as outlined in the Staff
Recommendation.
The vote was 7 ayes,1 noe,2 absent and 1 open position.The
application was approved.
4
November 30,1993
I EM 7 FILE —4 -E
gAME:CANDLEWOOD III —RE —PLAT
~L @GATIg:North and West off Rivercrest Drive at the end of
Marina Drive
~E~IE~E
CHAR-BEC TRUST CRIST ENGINEERS,INC.
c/o Johnny Mitchum Woodlands Plaza 1,Suite 202
P.O.Box 2317 5905 Forest Place
Batesville,AR 72503 Little Rock,AR 72207
371-0642 664-1552
AREA:36.385 ACRES NUMBE L T :5 FT.W R T:0
~Z~IQ:R-2
P I DI TRI T:1
VAR E RE E TED:None
T T PR AL:
The applicant proposes to re-plat an existing subdivision in
order to dedicate the street right-of-way to the City and gain
acceptance by the City of the street construction.
A.PR P AL RE E T:
The applicant requests review and approval by the Planning
Commission of a re-plat of Candlewood III.The original
preliminary plat of the subdivision was approved by the
Planning Commission on January 3,1989.The final plat was
approved on December 20,1989.The originally approved plat
showed an access easement and a private street on the
property.The current request is to re-plat the subdivision
in order to dedicate the street right-of-way and seek
acceptance of the already-constructed street as a public
street for public maintenance.
B.EXI TI IT
The current zoning is R-2.Marina Drive is constructed from
the subdivision boundary on the east to a termination at the
western most lot.There has been no development activity to
construct homes in the development,and the land is
overgrown and wooded.
November 30,1993
ITEM 7 —4 -E Cont.
C.E I EERI TILITY COMME T
The City Engineering office reports that 800 feet of a 27
foot wide residential street was built in 1989 by plans
approved by the City.The project file does not indicate
that inspections were made during the construction,but the
engineering staff recalls possibly making some inspections.
A final inspection,however,was made and,after completionof"punch list"repairs and modifications,the street
construction was approved.Earlier this year,as the
developer prepared to seek approval of the re-plat and
dedication to the City of the right-of-way and improvements,
the Engineering staff inspected the work in place.The
developer was sent a "punch list"of work to be performed
and clean-up to be done.When this work is completed and
approved by the City,and after the developer submits a
maintenance bond,Engineering recommends approval of the
request to re-plat the subdivision with a public street.
Water Works reports that access will have to be provided to
the area to maintain and/or replace facilities and to read
meters.
Arkansas Power &Light,ARKLA Gas,and Southwestern Bell
approved the submittal without comment.
D.I E LE AL TE H I AL DESIGN:
The original final plat was prepared by Robert D.Holloway,Inc.This engineering firm is no longer engaged by the
developer,and the engineer of record is Crist Engineering,Inc.Crist Engineering will need to survey the property and
prepare the revised final plat ~All surveying and
engineering certifications must be completed.The re-plat
must show the 50 foot right-of-way dedication.
E.~ANALY I
With minor repairs or modifications required by the City
Engineering office and submitting the required maintenance
bond,the existing street is approved for dedication to and
maintenance by the City.When the current engineer of
record completes the new survey and preparation of the plat,all requirements will have been met.There are no other
outstanding
issues'.
TAFF RE MME DATIO
Staff recommends approval of the re-plat,subject to meeting
City Engineering requirements noted above.
2
November 30,1993
ITEM '—4 -E on
BDIVI I N MMITTEE OMMENT:(November 10,1993)
Representatives of the applicant,Mr.Wingfield Martin and theengineer,Mr.Less Price,were present.Staff outlined therequesttotheCommitteeandreviewedthecommentsfromthediscussionoutline.It was explained to the applicant that thepreviouslyapprovedandfiledplatcannotsimplybenotedand
amended,but must be a new document,properly prepared andexecuted.With that explanation,the Committee forwarded theitemtotheCommissionforfinalresolution.
PLANNING MMI I A TION:(NOVEMBER 30,1993)
Staff reported that there were no issues remaining to beresolved.The item was included on the Consent Agenda for
approval,and was approved with the vote of 9 ayes,no nays,1 absent,no abstentions,and 1 open position.
3
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
CO
M
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
VO
T
E
RE
C
O
R
D
BA
T
E
hi
p
~
.
9
95
IP
P
&UL
P
d
2
ME
M
B
E
R
4
5
7
8
t"
D
E
1
Zy
6
BA
L
L
,
RA
M
S
E
Y
r
r
r
/
CH
A
C
H
E
R
E
,
DI
A
N
E
p,
~
p,
WI
L
L
I
S
,
EM
M
E
T
T
iH
PT
'
2
e
~
0
&
MC
D
A
N
I
E
L
,
JO
H
N
NI
C
H
O
L
S
O
N
,
JE
R
I
L
Y
N
te
r
OL
E
S
O
N
,
KA
T
H
L
E
E
N
r
Z
r
z
r
e
8
g
VO
N
T
U
N
G
E
L
N
,
JI
M
PU
T
N
A
M
,
BI
L
L
r
r
Z
r'
r
WO
O
D
S
,
RO
N
A
L
D
CF
F
p,
.—
[
-g
~
cE
,
SE
L
Z
,
JO
E
H.
WA
L
K
E
R
,
BR
A
D
TI
M
E
IN
AN
D
TI
M
E
OU
T
BA
L
L
.
RA
M
S
E
Y
tN
A
~
rZ
:
S
a
CH
A
C
H
E
R
E
DI
A
N
E
I~
H
A~
4Z
:
3o
WI
L
L
I
S
,
EM
M
E
T
T
tg
p~
t
g
,
~
MC
D
A
N
I
E
L
,
JO
H
N
[g
p~
[Z
.
'
3
0
NI
C
H
O
L
S
O
N
,
JE
R
I
L
Y
N
OL
E
S
O
N
,
KA
T
H
L
E
E
N
~
g
4~
Q,
'
3
Q
VO
N
T
U
N
G
E
L
N
,
JI
M
t(
PU
T
N
A
M
,
BI
L
L
WO
O
D
S
,
RO
N
A
L
D
QF
F
p|
"
SE
L
Z
,
JO
E
H.
wa
s
NT
WA
L
K
E
R
,
BR
A
D
Ac
e
~
AY
E
~
NA
Y
E
+
AB
S
E
N
T
~A
B
S
T
A
I
N
I
November 30,1993
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Date
S etary'hai n