The URL can be used to link to this page

pc_11 09 2006LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING —REZONING —CONDITIONAL USE HEARING MINUTE RECORD NOVEMBER 9,2006 5:00 P.M. I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being nine (9)in number. II.Members Present:Gary Langlais Chauncey Taylor Troy Laha Robert Stebbins Jerry Meyer Jeff Yates Lucas Hargraves Darrin Williams Pam Adcock Members Absent:Mizan Rahman Fred Allen,Jr. City Attorney:Debra Weldon III.Approval of the Minutes of the September 28,2006 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission.The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING —REZONING —CONDITIONAL USE HEARING NOVEMBER 9,2006 5:00 P.M. I.OLD BUSINESS: Item Number:File Number:Title A.Z-8079 Hobbs Group Home —Special Use Permit 1507 Hanger Street B.Z-8102 Brewer Group Home —Special Use Permit 1812 Schiller Street C.LU06-08-04 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning District for a change from Single Family and Mixed Use to Office and Neighborhood Commercial at 1401 Bishop Street and 1311 Bishop Street. C.1.Z-8101 Rezoning from R-3 and 0-3 to 0-2 and C-3 1311 and 1401 Bishop Street D.Z-7935-A Vedant Society of Arkansas— Revised Conditional Use Permit 10224 Nash Lane E.S-1545 Nettles Subdivision Preliminary Plat,located on Isbell Lane. II.NEW BUSINESS: Item Number:File Number:Title 1.G-23-368 Alley —Right-of-Way Abandonment Block 169,Original City of Little Rock 2.Z-8123 Rezoning from R-2 to 0-3 12819 Kanis Road 3.Z-3476-A Best Car Wash —Conditional Use Permit 2801 West Markham Street 4.Z-4457-B Verizon Wireless —Tower Use Permit 14000 Otter Creek Parkway Agenda,Page Two II.NEW BUSINESS: Item Number:File Number:Title 5.Z-6014-B Saddle Creek Church K-4 Pre-School— Conditional Use Permit 18020 Cantrell Road 6.Z-6994-A Rezoning from R-3 and 1-2 to PR North side of West 10"Street,East of Woodrow Street 7.LU06-19-07 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District changing from Single Family,Multifamily,Public Institutional and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family,Low Density Residential,Multifamily,Suburban Office,Neighborhood Commercial and Commercial either side of Kanis Road from Chenal Parkway to Stewart Road. 8.LU06-19-08 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District changing from Single Family,Low Density Residential and Suburban Office to Mixed Office Commercial south of State Highway 10 at State Highway 300. 9.Proposed Amendments to various sections of Chapters 31 and 36 of the Code of Ordinances;the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. HWY IO COUNTY,APR RO Public Hearing Items 6 /,) C.l C FRISE L'A:'FY AAf"RKP :-6! C.' RT 'V!T= 6 ''6 RY '~T YYY I 8 RIG ( CO —A4LTYC OAT,I !'ARSON P CY 6 Y2 —AAO 'it'SF LA RSCR F.Ai'FIR OAVP Eu EH.:i! 0 OOOO 'I BARLEY I —4!l ITY L'.tP'„- PIRE 66 D !BY RARE BASE'N OIRO!i BAS"TNE S6 RS Y 6 6 C'TY OMITS 66 16!ASHER PRATI Planning —Rezoning —Conditional Use Hearing NQVE HER 9,2006 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:Z-8079 NAME:Hobbs Group Home —Special Use Permit LOCATION:1507 Hanger Street OWNER:Monica Bryant APPLICANT:Carolyn Hobbs PROPOSAL:A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a group home to be operated in the single-family residence located on the R-4 zoned property at 1507 Hanger Street. A.Public Notification: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Hanger Hill Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. B.B~ff A 1507 Hanger Street is located on the east side of Hanger Street,south of East 15"Street.The property contains a two-story frame single-family residential structure.There is a two-story frame accessory garage structure in the rear yard,near the southeast corner of the property. There is a one-car wide driveway from Hanger Street at the southwest corner of the property,leading to the accessory garage structure.There is parking for at least two (2)vehicles.There is also a partially paved alley along the rear (east)property line. The general area contains a mixture of residential property zoned primarily R-4.There are single-family residences,duplex structures,vacant lots and boarded-up houses in the area. The applicant,Carolyn Hobbs,proposes to utilize the existing 2,200 square foot structure as a group home.The residential facility will serve as a transitional living facility and provide chemical free living for eight (8) female residents.There will be a house manager who will live on the site. Each bedroom in the house will have two (2)beds.There is a total of five (5)bedrooms.The applicant has noted that the group home has operated at this location since 1999. The typical resident is a recovering addict and is required to attend four (4) outside 12-step meetings each week.Each resident is required to be November 9,2006 ITEM NO:A Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8079 gainfully employed.There will be in-house support groups,with referral to outside agencies for individual sessions.Education on life skills management,job preparation and job assistance will be provided by the facility.A copy of the House Rules/Regulations has been provided and is attached for Commission Review. The site is not located on a CATA bus route.Bus Route ¹20 (College Station Route)runs along East 15"Street,less than a block to the north. The applicant has noted that residents will not own vehicles,and will use the public transportation. Section 36-54(e)(4)of the City's Zoning Ordinance provides the following provisions for Group Home Facilities,as adopted by the Board of Directors on September 6,2005: (4)family care facility,group care facility,group home,parolee or probationer housing facility,rooming,lodging and boarding facility: (a)Separation,spacing and procedural requirements for family care facilities,group care facilities,group homes,parolee or probationer housing facilities and rooming,lodging and boarding facilities will be determined by the planning commission so as not to adversely impact the surrounding properties and neighborhood.Unless the commission determines that a different area is more appropriate,a neighborhood shall be defined as an area incorporating all properties lying within one thousand five hundred (1,500)feet of the site for which the permit is requested. (b)There shall be a presumption that a special use permit for a group home of 5,6,7,or 8 handicapped persons will be granted if all ordinance requirements are met,except that individuals whose tenancy would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals of whose tenancy would result in substantial physical damage to the property of others shall not be allowed in such a home. (c)Issues that the planning commission will consider during its review of a family care facility,group care facility,group home,parolee or probationer housing facility,or rooming,lodging and boarding facility include,but are not limited to: 1.Spacing of existing similar facilities. 2.Existing zoning and land use patterns. 3.The maximum number of individuals proposed to be served,the number of employees proposed and the type of services being proposed. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:A Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8079 4.The need and provision for readily accessible public or quasi- public transportation. 5.Access to needed support services such as social services agencies,employment agencies and medical service providers. 6.Availability of adequate on-site parking. (d)The fire marshal must approve the use of any structure proposed as a family care facility,group care facility,group home,parolee or probation housing facility or rooming,lodging and board facility. (e)Family care facilities,group care facilities,group homes and parole or probation housing facilities shall be operated within any and all applicable licensing and procedural requirements established by the State of Arkansas. According to an area survey,staff found only one (1)other residential transitional living facility within 1,500 feet of the property.There is a group home use being operated at 1404 Hanger Street by Buddy Dorris for approximately 10 residents and two (2)employees.This group home is an illegal use and is currently under enforcement by the City.The case is currently pending in Pulaski County Circuit Court. Based on the information submitted by the applicant,the total area of the structure and the area per bedroom will comply with Sections 8-406(a) and (b)of the City's Buildings and Building Regulations Ordinance (minimum area per dwelling unit and bedroom).Each bedroom has 144 square feet of living area. The applicant submitted a copy of the Bill of Assurance for the neighborhood which was recorded in 1893.The Bill of Assurance is handwritten and not completely legible.It likely addresses no use issues. Staff is supportive of the requested special use permit to allow a group home at 1507 Hanger Street.Staff believes the group home at 1507 Hanger Street meets the intent of Ordinance No.19,395 which was passed by the City Board of Directors on September 6,2005 and provides the criteria for this type of transitional living facility (Section 36-54(e)(4). As noted previously,a survey of the neighborhood found only one (1) other transitional living facility which is currently under enforcement.Staff believes the group home at this location will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.There are a number of vacant residential lots and boarded-up homes in the neighborhood. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:A Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8079 C.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(SEPTEMBER 7,2006) Carolyn Hobbs and three (3)residents of the facility were present, representing the application.Staff presented the item and asked for additional information on the group home use.Ms.Hobbs noted that all of the residents were women and had been through treatment centers.She gave a brief description of the group home use,noting that it had been at 1507 Hanger Street since 1999. After the discussion,the Committee forwarded her application to the full Commission for resolution. D.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a group home at 1507 Hanger Street,subject to the following conditions: 1.The group home will be for a maximum of eight (8)residents,with one (1)on-site employee. 2.Compliance with the provisions of Section 36-54(e)(4)of the City' Zoning Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 17,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter on July 20,2006 requesting the application be deferred to the September 28, 2006 Agenda.Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the September 28,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays,and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 28,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred to the November 9,2006 Agenda to resolve issues raised by the City Attorney's Office. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the November 9,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:A Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8079 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.The application was approved. 5 J,'/ Human Elevation Love Pr GJ«t I'Chemical FJ ee LJving) i reap'ouse Pules 7 Regulations Resident's Name.. 1.Any alcohol or other debug-use on or off HELP Home premises is strictly pr ohibitedl 2.Vou ar e r equired to be,gainfully employed be fore the,encl of your fir st week T HELP Home.Any exceptions must be,specified and appr oved by House Manager iosfor e you enter into r ssidenrs.psgar diass of any circumstances surrounding your smpiaymsnt situation,na one aiiwsd to "hand around"in the HELP Home,on Monday tht"u Friday between the house of Tf you feel the need to "hang ou1"please,feel free,to go To Wolfe.StJ"eet QAd VGILJAteer'oLJJ"1ime.Th Jsis betteJ"thaA sittiAg QJ"GLJAcl doJAg AothJAg QAcl gett J Ag J Ato you J"s el f. 3.j:f for any reason you are involun1arily terminated fr om HELP Home 1here will be no J"efund of any rent paid. 4.A five-dollar 4'$5)key deposit is r equir ect up front at the time a per son enters in1o residence at HELP Home,.This deposit is J efundable.Qt such time,that the key is J etur ned to the House.Manager or owneJ and 1her e is no J.ent pas1.due.I'f you do not have the,money up front for key deposit,you will be expected to pay1he.Qmoun1 out of your first paycheck. 5.Fighting,sexual harassment,verbal abuse.,1he ft and willful/negligent destruction of the property of others (including property)will J"esult in immedia1 e,eviction'fr om HELP Home. 6.Overnight passos are not permitted-unless ihc foiiowing conditions have been met: a.To receive a one-day pass ycu must have.been a r esiden1'f HELP Home for't least 1'wo weeks„"foJ Q two-clay pass,thJ"ee months.FotllJ'- 1yr ~d.I|g|*p I*d case-by-case basis if ou make our House Mana er aware of Gur situation be fuI eked.j:gnor ing this r ule will r esult in immediate, eviction fr om HELP Home.. b.you must submit your ou1 side meeting attendance sheet;pr ior to r eceivlng PQSS. c.Vour rent payments eust be,current I'for example,,if you owe,any back vent you will not r ereive a pass of any kind). d.You must hcvP.QbldPd by all othPI"I"UIPs Qnd standaf"ds Qs dPtPI Ninecl by your House Manager. Items A-5 Qr e the minimum I e Ull"PNPnts t'o bP.Pven consldel ed for'btQInlng Q pass.Passes are earned,nat given Zf the House Manager feels a pass wilt a~id our ~recover,you wilt prohaioiy get one.Crn the other hand,if they ioelieve.that a pass would present an obvious r elapse,r isk,you pr obcbly will not obtain one,—r egar dless of other factors. 7.Bedr Goes QI e to be,kept clean at all tiees.Pour Qr e I"equired to share in household duties as a condition o f your being allowed to live,in Human Elevation Love Pr"GJPct.Specific hoUSPholcl cILltles will bP dPtPI mined and assiignPcl accol"cIIngly by the House Managel". 8.Each Human Elevation Love Project resident is I esponsibie for payment of their r ent on a timely basis,as deteI mined by the House Manager and/or Owner.If r ent is in QI.real.s this constitute gl"ounds for immediate dismissal f r Gm Human Elevation Love Pr oject.D you ar e affected by sudden f inancial pr oblems you are expected to notify the House,Manager cs soon as possible. 9.Absolutely no visitor s of the,opposite,sex cllowed in the House.All other visitor s (family,same sex fr iends,sponsor s,etc.)are,not allowed without the expr ess per mission of your House Manager. 10.Alii HLlman EIPvation Love Pr Gject r esidents ar e expected to keep theil- per sonal appearances neet and clean.You will be,expected to follow the. dr ess cocle of your respective,Human Elevation Love Pr oject facility. 11,You Qr e r esponsible for all laundry and per sonal hygiene,pr oducts. 12.Any supplies Gr maintenance r epair s r.equested cr e to be pl"esented to the, House.Manger in wr iting.These requests need to be.signed and dated. 13.All facility r esidPnts that ar e taking legally pr escr ibed medications that ar e not mood altel"lng ancl I"esponslble fol"thP Qdministl'ation and secUr"lty Gf these eedications. 14.VGU are,required to attend at least I )outside 12-Step meetings (for example,AA,NA,CA/AI-Anon)each week in addition to your regularly scheduled GUtpatlent NePtlngs,Any fciIUI e to cIG so can I esUIt ln immediate eviction from Human Elevation Love Pr ojert. 15.No guns,knives,clubs or any Other potential weapons will be,permitted on ted&-Pl"PlTIlses. 1b.No pets are allowed cn the pr emises. 17.Poommates are,expected to r espect one another's hygiene,and pr oper ty at all times.Cur few and lights out in the bedrooms ar e at 11pm on Sunday thr u Thur sday nights,and at 12 midnight on l=r iday and Satur day nights,Anyone keeping cur few but not in bed after lights out,need to r espect their I"GommQtP.by not tur'ning on Qny lIghts whPn PntPr'lng the r'oom.Also any disruptive,or raucous behavior after curfew will not be,toleI"ated. 18.Additional and/OI"amended rules may be established in a variety of ways. Pules will not change unless sarIctioned by the Human Elevation Love Project staff in paI"ticular.you will be promptly notified of any changes.When in doubt,consult your House Manager.Do not trust "THE GPAPEVj:NE"to provide you with reliable information regarding the rules, These r ules ar e intended to insure,your recovery and personal stability.As you know by now,I ecovery r equlr es matull Ity Qnd a sPnse of r esponsllblllty,Tn GthPP yy I*fll I fy contr act unless ou ar e M/illin to obser ve/folllow these rules. Human Elevation Love Pr oject is you home for now so treat it as such,0/e welcome your questions and suggestions concer ning Human Elevation Love Pr oject. PEMEMBEP THAT NO MATTFP.HOM/VOU l EA VE HUMAN ELEVAWQN LOVE P@OZECS YOU SHOULD STAV ACTLVE IN VOUS PECQVEPV. The,above Human Elevation Love Pr oject Pules and Standards have been explained to me and j:fully under stand all of them.FailuI e to abide by these r ules will produce,consequences including eviction fI Gm Human Elevation Love Project. Sigfffftfff t.ftf Clitffti,Data .$;iIiIftri~&Pj QI4tf'@g-Dfite P.evised 7-Z4-OZ Human Elevation Love Pr oject (Chemical Fr ee Living) HQUSE PULE5 AND 5TANBARD5 ~gree to fully participate in the Clie.nt Following activities while r esiding in the Human Elevation Love Project.T.recogniize, that missing any scheduled activities.are prohibited.The only exceptions QI"e medical emergencies I'as verified by a doctor in wr iting)or peI mission obtained fr om House,Manager befor e,the,star t of any scheduled activity.Anytime I am excused from a scheduled activity I must immediately notify my House,Managel. j:f the House Manager is not immediately available then I understand that I am to I f~l*I I*f Weekl Human Elevation Love Pro'ect Process Gr ou /House Meetin Evel"y 5UAdav Qt time designated IA advance by the House Managef" Outside Meetings and Appointments Pequired by Human Elevation Love Pr oject and. P.ules: t.'pr kr"(~+)auteirie 12-step rneetinge aweek unieee other wiee epecifieft by House,iv'Ianager . 2,Mental health appointments as scheduled. 3.Rob intel"view as scheduled. 4.Vocation/Educational classes or training as scheduled. 5.Medical appointments as scheduled. 6.Medicaid/5ociai 5ecuf'ity appointments Qs scheduled 7.ProbatloA PQI"ole office/appointment. 8.Comply with all legal r equir ements.fff,l'**I I I f flllf f,~ld I I I ff agr ee to submit to a random urinalysis test wheneveI"my behavior is suspicious to the,House.Manager and they r equest me,to do so. My signatur e below indi~ates my full agr cement that I understand and will abide by all of the conditions noted above in this Collateral Contract. 5ignatare of Clipt Date 5ig'ig&tur e,o f House Managel Date, August I (8,2006 P -gr.a "7j To:WaoIT&It May Concern Re:]507 Hanger Street Frorll:Linda Hellson I 604 Geyer Street L.ittle Rock Ark 72202 l recelvcd notlcc of pUbllc hearing on a lequest to operate B gloUp hoITIC wlthln an cxlstlng Iesldentlal structure (transitional living facility for up to 8 persons)(Z-8079). I 80 NOT want this in my neighborhood,because of the crime that Is already on that pal tlcUlal"stl cct.Too mally mcn h.ang out Bll time of night,loUd ITlUslc,Using foU1 language etc.Our neighborhood has many seniol citizens and kids who need to see more positive Christian activity. The m(polity of thc tlITlc during wcckclads voU cannot get th~ough Hange~Stleet because of the party„cursing and loud music.The city closed a Gambling home on that pal tlcular strcct.To ITIy knowledge nothing changed, people Iust do cllITlc at B,dIIfelcnt time on that paltlcUlar street.I want to keep the neighborhood a good place to live. I vc bcerl ln this neighborhood BIITlost 30 years. November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:Z-8102 NAME:Brewer Group Home —Special Use Permit LOCATION:1812 Schiller Street OWNER:Madeline Carter APPLICANT:Greg Brewer PROPOSAL:A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a group home to be operated in the single-family residence located on the R-3 zoned property at 1812 Schiller Street. A.Public Notification: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified,and the Central High and Wright Avenue Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. B.B~ff A 1812 Schiller Street is located on the west side of Schiller Street,south of West 18"Street.The property contains a two-story brick and frame single-family residential structure.There is a two-story accessory garage structure (old carriage house)in the rear yard,at the northwest corner of the property.Both structures are currently vacant and in need of repair. There is a one-car wide driveway from Schiller Street at the northeast corner of the property.The driveway is partially concrete and extends along the north side of the residence and into the rear yard.There is parking for at least three (3)vehicles along this driveway. The general area contains a mixture of residential uses and zonings. Single-family residences are located immediately north,south and east of the site.There is an abundance of R-4 (duplex)and R-5 (multifamily) zoning in the neighborhood.There is commercial and office zoning along Wright Avenue to the southwest and southeast. The applicant,Greg Brewer,proposes to utilize the existing 3,857 square foot structure as a group home.The 1,262 square foot carriage house will also be used.The residential facility will serve as a transitional living facility and provide chemical free living for 14 residents.The principal structure will provide housing for 12 residents and a resident manager (basement level).The existing carriage house will house two (2) residents.There will be six (6)bedrooms in the principal structure,with November 9,2006 ITEM NO:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8102 two (2)residents per bedroom.The basement level is 680 square feet in area and will have only the resident manager. The house will be used as a group home providing care and supervision for individuals recovering from substance abuse who have already completed a treatment program and need transitional housing until they become fully self-supporting.Residents will be required to be gainfully employed.There will be house meetings by state licensed counselors with individual counseling as needed.Residents will also attend outside meetings.A handbook for the facility has not yet been written.However, the applicant notes that basic regulations will be as follows: a)All residents agree to random drug and alcohol testing.Failure to pass will be cause for dismissal. b)Residents will have house assignments —cleaning,yard work,etc. c)Residents will abide by all house rules —curfews,rents,cleaning duties,continuing care,steady employment. d)Careful records of all clients will be maintained such as meeting attendance,duties,income,and general overall recovery The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.Bus Route ¹16 (UALR Route)runs along Wright Avenue to the south.The applicant notes that some residents may have vehicles (those who are attaining independent living status).Transportation will be provided by the facility for group activities.Otherwise,the residents will utilize public transportation. Section 36-54(e)(4)of the City's Zoning Ordinance provides the following provisions for Group Home Facilities,as adopted by the Board of Directors on September 6,2005: (4)family care facility,group care facility,group home,parolee or probationer housing facility,rooming,lodging and boarding facility: (a)Separation,spacing and procedural requirements for family care facilities,group care facilities,group homes,parolee or probationer housing facilities and rooming,lodging and boarding facilities will be determined by the planning commission so as not to adversely impact the surrounding properties and neighborhood.Unless the commission determines that a different area is more appropriate,a neighborhood shall be defined as an area incorporating all properties lying within one thousand five hundred (1,500)feet of the site for which the permit is requested. (b)There shall be a presumption that a special use permit for a group home of 5,6,7,or 8 handicapped persons will be granted if all ordinance requirements are met,except that individuals whose tenancy would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8102 of whose tenancy would result in substantial physical damage to the property of others shall not be allowed in such a home. (c)Issues that the planning commission will consider during its review of a family care facility,group care facility,group home,parolee or probationer housing facility,or rooming,lodging and boarding facility include,but are not limited to: 1.Spacing of existing similar facilities. 2.Existing zoning and land use patterns. 3.The maximum number of individuals proposed to be served,the number of employees proposed and the type of services being proposed. 4.The need and provision for readily accessible public or quasi- public transportation. 5.Access to needed support services such as social services agencies,employment agencies and medical service providers. 6.Availability of adequate on-site parking. (d)The fire marshal must approve the use of any structure proposed as a family care facility,group care facility,group home,parolee or probation housing facility or rooming,lodging and board facility. (e)Family care facilities,group care facilities,group homes and parole or probation housing facilities shall be operated within any and all applicable licensing and procedural requirements established by the State of Arkansas. According to an area survey,staff found only one (1)other residential transitional living facility within 1,500 feet of the property.There is a group home type use being operated at 1908/1912 Park Street by Gyst House, which has existed for a number of years.There are currently 12 residents within the principal structure,and one (1)resident in an accessory structure.Staff found several other possible illegal transitional living facilities which are in the process of being investigated. Based on the information submitted by the applicant,the total area of the structure and the area per bedroom will comply with Sections 8-406(a) and (b)of the City's Buildings and Building Regulations Ordinance (minimum area per dwelling unit and bedroom).The bedrooms range from 149 square feet to 224 square feet and will each accommodate two (2)residents. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8102 The applicant submitted a copy of the Bill of Assurance for the neighborhood which was recorded in 1877.The Bill of Assurance is handwritten and not completely legible.It likely addresses no use issues. Staff is not supportive of the requested special use permit to allow a group home at 1812 Schiller Street.Based on the survey conducted by staff, there is another group home type use less than two (2)blocks from the site at 1908/1 912 Park Street.Staff feels that another residential facility in this immediate area is not appropriate.This residential area around Central High School has seen recent interest in revitalization efforts.Staff believes allowing additional transitional living facilities in this area could be detrimental to future revitalization efforts in this historic area of the city. Staff feels the applicant should seek another location for the proposed group home,in a neighborhood area with no close proximity to other residential facilities and preferably on a non-residential street (collector street or higher). C.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(SEPTEMBER 7,2006) Greg Brewer and Terry Burruss were present,representing the application.Staff presented the application,noting that additional information was needed on the group home use.There was a brief discussion of the current condition and history of the structure.The applicant noted that some of the residents may have their own vehicles when they are financially able,but at that point they usually move out of the group home setting.The issue of parking was briefly discussed. After the discussion,the Committee forwarded her application to the full Commission for resolution. D.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested Special Use Permit to operate a group home at 1812 Schiller Street. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 28,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred to the November 9,2006 Agenda to resolve issues raised by the City Attorney's Office. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the November 9,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8102 STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted revisions to the application to staff on October 17,2006. The applicant is now proposing a total of 10 clients/residents with one (1) resident manager,within the principal structure.Each resident will have a separate bedroom,with the resident manager's living quarters being in the basement level.The client bedrooms will range in size from 104 to 163 square feet.Two (2)bedrooms will be located on the first floor of the structure,with six (6)on the second floor and two (2)in the basement level.Kitchen,dining and living space will be located on the first floor and bathrooms will be located on both floors.As part of the revision,the property owner,Greg Brewer,will reside in the accessory structure and help manage the facility. The applicant has also proposed a parking plan for the property.The applicant notes that there will be no more than five (5)vehicles on the site at any time. The property owner will have one (1)vehicle,which will be parked in the accessory structure.A maximum of four (4)other vehicles owned by the residents/resident manager will be parked on a newly paved driveway along the north property line.The new drive will replace an existing drive and be constructed of concrete or brick pavers.The drive will extend from Schiller Street to the accessory building in the rear yard.There will be a "turn around"in the rear yard as part of the driveway construction.The "turn around"will also serve as a patio area. Staff is now supportive of the requested special use permit to allow a group home at 1812 Schiller Street.Staff feels the amendments made to the original application are reasonable.Although there is another group home type use less than two (2)blocks from this property,staff believes the reduction in the number of clients and the restriction on number of vehicles will allow this group home facility to have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties or the neighborhood.Staff also believes that allowing this group home will provide a reasonable accommodation for this type of facility in the neighborhood. REVISED STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the special use permit (as revised)to allow a group home at 1812 Schiller Street,subject to the following conditions: 1.The group home will be for a maximum of ten (10)residents,with one (1)on- site employee. 2.The property owner,Greg Brewer,must maintain residence in the accessory structure. 5 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8102 3.There will be no more than five (5)vehicles on the property owned by persons residing on the property. 4.Compliance with the provisions of Section 36-54(e)(4)of the City's Zoning Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) Greg Brewer and Terry Burruss were present,representing the application. There was one (1)person present in opposition.Staff presented the application and noted that the applicant had made revisions to the application.Staff supported the revised application. Greg Brewer addressed the Commission in support of the application.He made no additional comments to the staff presentation. Commissioner Adcock asked Mr.Brewer if he would reside on the property.Mr. Brewer noted that he would live in the carriage house at the time the group home is in operation. Josephine Dumas addressed the Commission in opposition.She presented a petition of opposition to the Commission.She noted that she spoke for the residents in the area.She briefly described the neighborhood and explained that the group home did not belong in the area.She expressed concern with the type of persons who resided in group home type facilities. Commissioner Williams asked if the neighborhood association was notified.Staff noted that the Central High and Wright Avenue Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.Commissioner Williams asked about Gyst House and staff's previous recommendation.Staff explained that the change in recommendation was based primarily on the revisions Mr.Brewer had made to the application. Commissioner Adcock asked if any of the residents would have a criminal background.Mr.Brewer explained that it would be possible and that he did not discriminate based on a person's background.Commissioner Adcock asked Mr.Brewer why he chose this location.Mr.Brewer noted that it was a nice historic structure in need of rehabilitation and that he wanted to live on the property. There was a brief discussion of the proposed group home and its compatibility with the neighborhood. 6 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8102 Commissioner Yates asked about other possible illegal group home type uses in the area.Staff noted that none had been confirmed,but the investigation process was still taking place. Terry Burruss addressed the Commission in support of the application.He noted that there were several vacant properties in the area.He explained that the proposed group home would have a minimal impact on the area.He noted that the applicant had been working with staff on making the proposed group home compatible with the neighborhood. Commissioner Yates asked about the remodeling of the structure.Mr.Burruss explained that the structure will be remodeled so that it could be converted to a single family home in the future with minimal changes.He also noted that there would be no change to the building's exterior. Commissioner Yates asked about the turnaround in the rear yard.Mr.Burruss explained that it would be 12 to 15 foot square and take up a minimal amount of the rear yard.Commissioner Adcock asked if there would be any signage.Mr. Burruss stated that there would be none. In response to a question from the Commission,staff noted that the special use permit,if approved,would be for this specific property owner only and his occupancy of the property.Ms.Dumas made additional comments related to the group home. Commissioner Williams commented that the proposed group home would jeopardize the future redevelopment efforts in the neighborhood. There was a motion to approve the revised application as recommended by staff. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes,7 nays and 2 absent.The application was denied. 7 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:LU06-08-04 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Central City Planning District Location:Either side of Daisy Bates east of Bishop Street Receoest:Single Family and Mixed Use to Office and Neighborhood Commercial Source:Ron Woods PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District from Single Family to Office and Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial.The proposed Neighborhood Commercial is a quarter block at the northeast corner of Daisy Bates and Bishop Streets and the proposed Office is one lot at the southeast corner of Daisy Bates and Bishop Streets.Neighborhood Commercial includes limited small-scale commercial development in close proximity to a neighborhood.Office represents services provided directly to consumers as well as general offices,which support more basic economic activities.The proposed use of the property is for residential/office and commercial. Staff is not expanding this application because this area was reviewed within the past year. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is urban residential with one single-family residence and two duplexes.It is currently zoned 03 General Office District on the north side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive and R3 Single Family on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive.The site is 1 acre +in size.To the east and southeast of this site is zoned C3 General Commercial and is used for commercial type uses:a beauty parlor,a Church's Chicken and Uncle T's Food Mart.To the west is currently vacant,and it is zoned 02 General Office for a new medical clinic and a parking lot.To the southwest is zoned R3 Single Family for single-family residences.Immediately north of this site is zoned R4 Two Family District, but it is a vacant lot.Northeast of the area is zoned R5 and currently is used for multi family housing.The area to the south has a single-family residence on it,and there is very little space between the application area and this house.To the southwest of this site,on the southwest corner of Bishop and Daisy Gatson Bates is a Planned Office Development for a hair salon in a house. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: The application site is currently planned for Mixed Use on the north side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive.The portion of the application on the south side of Daisy Gatson November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-08-04 Bates Drive is planned for Single Family.To the southwest is also planned for Single Family Residential.To the east and southeast is planned Neighborhood Commercial, and to the west is Public Institutional.North of this site is planned for Mixed Office Commercial. October 4,2005,Ordinance 19418 amended multiple locations in this area. Immediately to the west of the application was changed from Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial.To the southeast was changed from Mixed Use to Single Family.And north of this site at 13"and Bishop was changed from Mixed Office Commercial to Public Institutional. March 19,2002,Ordinance 18656 changed multiple areas in this vicinity.Two blocks between Wolfe and Bishop and north of Daisy Gatson Bates were changed from Public Institutional and Mixed Use to Mixed Use and Public Institutional. MASTER STREET PLAN: Bishop Street is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan.The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties.Local Streets that are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as "Commercial Streets".These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector.Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan.The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials.These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. BICYCLE PLAN: A Class II route is shown along Daisy Gatson Bates Drive.A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5'houlder or six foot marked bike lane.Additional paving and right of way may be required. PARKS: According to the Master Parks Plan,this area is within eight blocks of a park or open space.The application area is located between three different parks:Centennial, Dunbar,and Ninth Street. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-08-04 CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The area is not covered by a city recognized Neighborhood Action Plan. ANALYSIS: The application site is part of an existing residential area in the Central City Planning District.The application site is on the north and south sides of Daisy L.Gatson Bates Drive on the east side of Bishop Street.Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is one of the main entryways into the Central High National Historic District.Central High School National Landmark is also accessed from downtown via Daisy Gatson Bates.As the entryway to this national landmark,this street and its development should be closely scrutinized. Within a half-mile of this application site there are various opportunities for Commercial uses on the Future Land Use Plan.The intersection of 16"Street and Martin Luther King Drive is occupied and planned for Neighborhood Commercial.Half a mile to the south of the application area is Wright Avenue,which is planned for either Mixed Use or Commercial between Summit and Pulaski Streets.This area has several vacant lots that could be developed for commercial use. Currently the portion of the application site on the north side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is planned for Mixed Use.A Planned Zoning Development (PZD)is required with the Mixed Use category if the use is entirely office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three (residential,office,commercial).A PZD would allow this area to be scrutinized more closely before development while a change to Neighborhood Commercial would allow small-scale commercial development without a PZD.While commercial uses are allowed in both Mixed Use and Neighborhood Commercial,Mixed Use category is preferable for this site because it requires the PZD.Children's Hospital is developing the site immediately west of the application area.A site plan review for a clinic in 02 zoning was required.One block further west on Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is an old school building that has been converted into apartments.This site was reviewed through the PZD process for a Planned Development-Residential.In essence,the two blocks immediately to the west went through a more intense plan review.In keeping with this trend,this new application site should be required to complete a PZD as required in the Mixed Use category. Another point to consider is that the tract of land just east of this application site,the quarter-block at the northwest corner of Martin Luther King Drive and Daisy Gatson Bates,is already planned for Neighborhood Commercial,zoned C3,and is vacant. While there is still vacant Neighborhood Commercial available with no development pending,a Land Use Amendment without a specific use seems premature.There does not seem to be a high demand in the area for more commercial uses.There are also many opportunities for office space to the north of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive.South of 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-08-04 Daisy Bates has a land use pattern of single-family residences.North of Daisy Bates is seeing increasing amounts of Children's Hospital owned property.The medical office uses will most likely continue to dominate this area north of Daisy Bates. The portion of the application site on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is planned for Single Family.There is currently a single-family residence on the lot and there are houses next door and across Bishop Street.These houses are the northernmost part of a larger area of housing that expands south to Roosevelt.These houses were built very close together,and there is very little space on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates between the proposed office and the single-family house on Bishop.Also,these single family homes face the side streets.This is an aspect of the neighborhood that needs to be protected and strengthened.A design review of development to the north of Daisy Bates can help to protect these side street facing houses.Again,a change to Suburban office instead of Office could be more appropriate since the Suburban Office category requires a PZD for the site.The juxtaposition between the Office and the Single Family needs to be addressed in the bulk,mass,and use of any proposed development.A change to Office on the Land Use Plan would be inappropriate because it would not leave any sort of buffer between the houses and the offices. Also,the Land Use Plan for this area was just reviewed last year,and Ordinance 19418 amended multiple locations in this area.The three acres adjacent to the east of this application site was changed from Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial.At the intersection of 15"Street and Dr.Martin Luther King Drive,four acres were changed from Office to Mixed Use.One block further south was changed from Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial.All these changes were intended to make the Land Use Plan more reflective of the existing land use,zoning and likely short-term future land use development of the area. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Central High Neighborhood,Inc.and Downtown Neighborhood Association.Staff has not received any comments. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate.Staff believes that not only the use but the design should be reviewed for the entry to a National Landmark Site such as Central High School. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-08-04 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 28,2006) At the request of the applicant this item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 9 for,0 against the consent agenda was approved. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral at the request of the applicant to December 7,2006.By a vote of 9 for,0 against (Rahman,Allen absent)the consent agenda was approved. 5 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-8101 Owner:William and Ron Woods Applicant:Ron Woods Location:1311 and 1401 Bishop Street Area:0.48 Acre and 0.16 Acre Request:Rezone from 0-3 to C-3 and R-3 to 0-2 Purpose:Future Development Existing Use:Single family residential structures SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —Arkansas Children's Hospital uses;zoned 0-3 and 0-2 South —Single family residences;zoned R-3 and R-4 East —Undeveloped property and commercial uses;zoned C-3 West —Undeveloped property and single family residential structures; zoned 0-2,POD and R-3 A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of S.Bishop Street and West 14"Street. 2.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way at the intersection of alley and 14"Street. B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.Bus Route ¹11 (M.L.King Route)runs along Martin Luther King Drive to the east. C.P U BLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified,and the Central High and Downtown Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. November 9,2006 ITEM NO:C.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8101 D.LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Central City Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family and Mixed Use for this property.The applicant has applied for a rezoning from 0-3 General Office District to C-3 General Commercial District and from R-3 Single Family District to 0-2 Office Institutional District. A land use plan amendment for a change to Office and Neighborhood Commercial is a separate item on this agenda. Master Street Plan: Bishop Street is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan.The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties.Local Streets which area abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as "Commercial Streets".These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. Daisy Gaston Bates Drive is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan.The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials.These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. ~Hi I Pl A Class II route is shown along Daisy Gaston Bates Drive.A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5'houlder or six foot marked bike lane.Additional paving and right-of-way may be required. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The area is not covered by a city recognized Neighborhood Action Plan. E.STAFF ANALYSIS: William and Ron Woods,owners of the 0.48 acre property at the northeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive and the 0.16 acre property at the southeast corner of the same intersection,are requesting to rezone the properties from 0-3 to C-3 and R-3 to 0-2 respectively.The rezoning is proposed for future development.The property at the northeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive is comprised of three (3)platted lots (Lots 4-6,Block 12,Centennial Addition).The property at the southeast corner of the intersection is one (1)platted lot. The property at the northeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive is occupied by three (3)single family residential structures.The lot at the 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:C.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8101 southeast corner is occupied by a brick and stucco single family residence. There are platted alley rights-of-way along the east side of both properties. There is a mixture of uses and zoning in this general area.Arkansas Children's Hospital property is located immediately north and west of the larger property.There is undeveloped C-3 zoned property and various commercial uses to the east.Single family residential structures and vacant lots are located to the south and southwest. The City's Future Land Use Plan designates the property at the northeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive as Mixed Use (MX).The lot at the southeast corner of the intersection is shown as Single Family (SF). A Land Use Plan amendment for changes from MX to Neighborhood Commercial and SF to Office is a separate item on this agenda (LU06-08- 04). Staff is not supportive of the requested C-3 and 0-2 rezoning.The property at the northeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive is shown on MX on the Future Land Use Plan.The MX designation requires a Planned Zoning Development (PZD)for any non-residential development of the property,which includes site plan review.Staff believes that site plan review for this property is very important.The property immediately to the west is zoned 0-2 and recently received site plan review approval for an Arkansas Children's Hospital facility.Additionally,this property is along the main entry drive to the Central High School area.Staff feels that building design,building setbacks,parking design and orientation and other various site plan criteria should be addressed by the Commission with development of this property. With respect to the lot at the southeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive,staff believes the zoning should remain single family residential.With the exception of the POD zoning immediately west,the properties south of Daisy Bates Drive and west of the C-3 zoned property at the southwest corner of M.L.King Drive and Daisy Bates Drive contain single family/two-family residences and are zoned R-3 and R-4.There are also a number of vacant lots in this area.Staff believes that new home construction could take place in this area in the near future,with renewed interest in the Central High area of Little Rock. F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 and 0-2 rezonings. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:C.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8101 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 28,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter on September 26,2006 requesting the application be deferred to the November 9, 2006 Agenda.Staff supported the deferral request. With a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent,the Commission voted to waive their bylaws and accept the deferral request being less than five (5)days prior to the public hearing. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the November 9,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant contacted staff on November 1, 2006 requesting the application be deferred to the December 21,2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 21,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:D FILE NO.:Z-7935-A Name:Vedant Society of Arkansas— Revised Conditional Use Permit Location:10224 Nash Lane ~O/A Vedant Society of Arkansas ~Pro oaal:A revision to a previously approved conditional use permit is requested to allow for increased occupancy and additional parking for this R-2 zoned place of worship.A deferral of the paving requirement is also requested. 1.SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the west side of Nash Lane;one property north of Mabelvale West Road. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The site is located in an area that has a variety of uses,several of which are institutional in nature.Two churches are located south of the site,at Mabelvale West Road.Another church is located north of the site,at Sibley Hole Road.A Little Rock School District campus and Little Rock Fire Department station are located west of the site,on Mabelvale West Road.Beyond the creek to the west of this site,a POD was recently approved which includes a mixture of office and residential uses.Single family homes are located to the north and east.Utilizing the existing residence on this 5.67+acre tract for a small place of worship is compatible with uses and zoning in the area. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and the SWLR United for Progress,Pinedale and Mavis Circle Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The site is currently served by a single driveway off of Nash Lane that previously served as a driveway for the residence.Under the current proposal,a second driveway will be located near the southern perimeter of the site providing access to a new,51 space parking lot.The proposed November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:D Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7935-A occupancy of the worship center is to increase from 40 persons to 200 persons,requiring 50 on-site parking spaces.The proposed parking will meet the ordinance requirement.The applicant is requesting a 5-year deferral of the paving requirement for the new parking lot.Staff does not support a deferral of that length. 4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinance is required. A street buffer averaging seventeen (17)feet in width is required on the Nash Lane perimeter. A land use buffer averaging thirty-four (34)feet in width is required on the western perimeter of the site.Seventy (70)percent of this buffer is to remain undisturbed.Easements cannot count toward fulfilling this requirement. A minimum nine (9)foot wide landscape strip is required along the south, west and east perimeters of the parking lot. An automatic irrigation system is required for all new landscape areas. Prior to the issuance of a building permit,it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site.Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6)inch caliper or greater. 5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: In accordance with Section 31-176,floodway areas must be shown as floodway easements or be dedicated to the public.In addition,a 25-foot wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway boundary. 6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater:Sewer available to this property. Entergy:No Comments received. CenterPoint Energy:No Comments received. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:D Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7935-A AT8T (SBC):Approved as submitted. Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s)are required. Fire Department:No Comments received. County Planning:No Comments. CATA:A CATA bus route is located south of this site,along Mabelvale West Road. Plannin Division:No Comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(SEPTEMBER 7,2006) The applicant was present.Staff presented the item and noted that the plan was inadequate.Staff stated the applicant should submit plans,which had been drawn by a design professional since there were more issues to address with a parking lot of this size.The Committee agreed.Public Works Landscape Comments were presented.It was noted that the plan did not provide for required landscape and buffers.The applicant agreed to seek a design professional.It was determined to defer the item,with a revised plan to be presented at the October 19,2006 Subdivision Committee meeting. STAFF ANALYSIS: On October 13,2005,the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow use of the existing residential structure on this R-2 zoned,5.76+ acre tract as a place of worship.The applicants proposed a worship area accommodating 40 persons.The existing driveway was to be widened and 10 parking spaces were to be constructed near the structure.Signage consists of a single,6-foot tall 6-foot square sign.Lighting consists of a night-watcher and porch lights. Activities on the site are typical for a place of worship.Currently,the group gathers once a month for prayer on a Saturday between 6:00 p.m.—9:00 p.m. In the future,the frequency of worship may change.Lessons are taught to children on Indian classical music,Indian classical dance and Indian culture and religion.Occasionally,cultural functions are conducted and Indian festivals are celebrated.There will also be miscellaneous community related activities.There are no plans to have outdoor activities. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:D Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7935-A The attendance at the facility has increased and the applicants are now proposing to increase the occupancy of the worship area to 200 persons.To accommodate the increase in attendance,a new 50 car parking lot is proposed to be constructed on the southern portion of the site.A single driveway will provide access to the new parking lot.The existing driveway and small parking area near the structure will remain.The applicants are requesting a 5-year deferral of the paving requirement for the new parking lot. On October 17,2006,the applicants submitted a revised site plan which addressed all issues raised at the September 7,2006 Subdivision Committee meeting.All required buffers,landscape areas and setbacks have been provided.The floodway/floodplain are shown,as is the required 25-foot access easement along the perimeter of the floodway.The revised plan was reviewed by the Subdivision Committee on October 19,2006. Staff is supportive of the requested revised C.U.P.The proposed new parking lot is to be located on the southern perimeter of the site,where the adjacent property is zoned 0-3.The use is compatible with uses and zonings in the area. There is no bill of assurance for this acreage tract. Staff does not,however,support a 5-year deferral of the paving requirement for the new parking lot.Staff will support a deferral of no more than 24 months subject to the gravel being contained within a border such as crossties,the buffer being protected and the driveway and apron being paved for a distance of 60 feet from the edge of the pavement of Nash Lane. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested revised conditional use permit subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of a 24-month deferral of the paving requirement for the new,50 space parking lot subject to the following conditions: 1.The required buffer area south of the parking lot is to be marked and protected. 2.The gravel is to be contained within an approved border such as crossties. 3.The driveway apron on to Nash Lane is to be constructed and paved to comply with city code and the driveway is to be paved for a distance no less than 60 feet from the edge of the pavement of Nash Lane to prevent gravel from being tracked onto the street. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:D Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7935-A STAFF REPORT: After the Subdivision Committee meeting on September 7,2006,it was determined that the item needed to be deferred to allow the applicant time to engage a design professional to prepare a site plan.Staff recommends deferring the item to the November 9,2006 Commission meeting with a revised site plan to be submitted in time for review at the October 19,2006 Subdivision Committee meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 28,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the application needed to be deferred to the November 9,2006 Agenda to allow the applicant time to have a site plan prepared. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the November 9,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions and comments noted in the "Staff Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff;including the 24-month paving deferral.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 5 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:S-1545 NAME:Nettles Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION:Located on Isbell Lane DEVELOPER: Jim and Shirley Nettles 15080 Taylor Loop Road Little Rock,AR 72223 ENGINEER: Civil Design,Inc. 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock,AR 72223 AREA:3 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 Lots 8 2 Tracts FT.NEW STREET:0 LF CURRENT ZONING:R-2,Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT:1 —River Mountain CENSUS TRACT:42.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. A.P ROPOSAL/REQUEST: The purpose of the request is to split an existing tract containing approximately 3 acres of residentially zoned property into two (2)single-family residential lots and two tracts.The two tracts are proposed for dedication to the Corp of Engineers.Central Arkansas Water and an existing septic tank system will provide water and wastewater services,respectively.Lot 1 contains the existing residence and is proposed to contain approximately 1.442 acres and Lot 2 is currently undeveloped and is proposed to contain 1.035 acres.Tract 1 is proposed containing 0.248 acres and Tract 2 containing 0.285 acres The site is located outside the City limits but within the City's Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:E Cont.FILE NO.:S-1545 B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family home located on the banks of the Arkansas River.There is an existing dock located behind the home proposed for removal.There are single-family homes located along County Farm Road and Isbell Lane.A plat for this area was recently approved by the Commission to allow the creation of ten new homes sites to the east.A new home has been constructed just east of this site on one of the approved lots. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,staff has not received any comment from area property owners. All abutting property owners,the River Valley Neighborhood Association and the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Property is within the floodway of the Arkansas River.Contact Pulaski County Planning Department for information pertaining to construction in the floodway. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Easement required on this property for future Little Rock Wastewater Utility Sewer Main.The site is located outside the service boundary. Provide the means of the proposed wastewater collection and treatment with approval from the appropriate State or County agency.Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. EntercnEr:No comment received. Center-Point Ener:No comment received. AT 8 T:No comment received. Central Arkansas Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter.~RD:Pl I hyd p d.C h U I R kF Department for additional information.Maintain a minimum paved access of 20-feet. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:E Cont.FILE NO.:S-1545 ~P"Pl 1.Submit a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the property.This study must be sufficient to support a No-Rise/No-Adverse Impact statement and include the recent development of Two Rivers Harbor.Submit the study no later than October 20,2006. 2.A floodplain development permit form Pulaski County Planning is required for any construction on this site in addition to the required study. CATA:The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:No comment. ~Landaca e:No comment. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 5,2006) Mr.James Dreher was present representing the request.Staff presented an overview of the proposed subdivision indicating there were outstanding issues associated with the request.Staff requested the applicant provide the correct location of the site on the vicinity map,the front setback line and the source of title in the general notes section of the plat. Public Works comments were addressed.Staff stated the property was located within the floodway of the Arkansas River.Staff stated approval from Pulaski County Planning would be required prior to final approval. Pulaski County Planning Comments were addressed.Staff stated a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the property was required prior to approval.Staff stated the study should be sufficient to support a no-rise/no-impact statement and include the recent development of Two Rivers Harbor Subdivision.Staff also noted a floodplain development permit from Pulaski County Planning was required prior to any construction on the site. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification.There was no further discussion of the item.The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYS IS: The applicant submitted a revised plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the October 5,2006,Subdivision Committee meeting.The applicant has redrawn the plat to remove the variance request indicating two tracts along 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:E Cont.FILE NO.:S-1545 the northern perimeter of the site.A note on the plat indicates the tracts will be dedicated to the Corp of Engineers. The purpose of the request is to split an existing tract containing approximately 3 acres of residentially zoned property into two (2)single-family residential lots and two tracts.Lot 1 is proposed to contain approximately 1.442 acres and Lot 2 is proposed to contain 1.035 acres.Tract 1 is proposed to contain 0.248 acres and Tract 2 0.285 acres. Central Arkansas Water and an existing septic tank system will provide water and wastewater services,respectively.The site is located outside the City limits but within the City's Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The applicant has not provided a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the property.Staff feels this issue should be addressed prior to the approval of the plat.The plat indicates a note stating no development will occur on Lot 2 until the property owner obtains a no rise certificate for the proposed improvements in accordance with applicable law.Staff does not feel this is sufficient and the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis should be completed prior to approval of the lot split. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the applicant provide a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the property prior to action by the Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 26,2006) The applicant was present representing the request.There were no registered objectors present.Staff presented a recommendation the applicant provide a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the property and gain written approval from the Pulaski County Planning Department prior to action by the Commission. There was no further discussion of the item.The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral.The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present representing the request.There were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had provided the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis to Pulaski County and staff had received written approval from the County accepting the findings of the study.Staff presented a 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:E Cont.FILE NO.:S-1545 recommendation of approval of the proposed lot split subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D,E and F and the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item.The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for approval.The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 5 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:FILE NO.:G-23-368 Name:Alley Right-of-Way Abandonment Location:Block 169,Original City of Little Rock (block bounded by West12th West13th Center and Louisiana Streets). Owner/Applicant:EMOBA/Ernie Dodson Request:To abandon the north/south 12 foot wide alley right-of-way (12 feet by 300 feet)located within Block 169,Original City of Little Rock. Purpose:The abandonment is requested in order to restrict activity within the alley right-of-way area to provide increased security and safety. STAFF REVIEW: A.Public Need for this Ri ht-of-Wa: As noted in paragraph G.of this report,all of the public utility companies consent to the right-of-way abandonment.Three (3)of the utilities request all or part of the area of abandonment be retained as a utility easement. The Public Works Comment is as follows: 1.Drainage easements should be maintained in the right-of-way to convey storm water from adjacent property. B.Master Street Plan: There are no Master Street Plan issues,as the right-of-way is not classified as a Collector Street or higher. C.Characteristics of Ri ht-of-Wa Terrain: The alley right-of-way is currently paved and runs between West 12"and West 13"Streets.The alley is used to access parking lots within the east and west halves of the block. November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:G-23-368 D.Develo ment Potential After abandonment,the applicant proposes to restrict activity within the alley area to provide increased security and safety.There is a dumpster located within the south 50 feet of the alley,serving the property at the southwest corner of the block.An access easement must be maintained to assure continued service of the dumpster. E.Nei hborhood and Land Use Effect EMOBA (Ernie Dodson)owns all of Block 169,Original City of Little Rock, with the exception of Lot 6 (southwest corner of the block)and portions of Lots 1 and 2 (northwest corner of the block).There are multifamily-type structures on these three (3)lots.The other three (3)owners within this block are not parties to the abandonment request,but have been notified of the public hearing. F.Nei hborhood Position The Downtown,Pettaway Park and MacArthur Park Neighborhood Associations were notified of the abandonment request.As of this writing, staff has received one (1)phone call from the owner of the lot at the southwest corner of the block obtaining information on the abandonment request. G.Effect on Public Services or Utilities Wastewater:No objection to abandonment.Retain entire area as a utility easement for existing sewer main. Entergy:No objection to abandonment.Retain entire area as a utility easement. Centerpoint Energy:No objection to abandonment. AT8T (SBC):No objection to abandonment.Retain 15-foot wide utility easement,7 '/~feet on each side of existing pole line within western boundary of alley. Water:No objection to abandonment. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:G-23-368 H.Reversionar Ri hts This alley right-of-way was dedicated with the Original City of Little Rock Subdivision.All reversionary rights will extend equally to the owners of all adjacent lots within Block 169,Original City of Little Rock. I.Public Welfare and Safet Issues Abandoning this alley right-of-way will have no adverse impact on the public welfare and safety.The Little Rock Fire Department has expressed no objection to the abandonment request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(OCTOBER 19,2006) The applicant was not present.Staff presented the application to the Committee. The application was forwarded to the full Commission with no additional dIscussIon. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the abandonment of the 12 foot wide north/south alley right-of-way located within Block 169,Original City of Little Rock,subject to the following conditions: 1.The entire area of abandonment must be retained as a utility and drainage easement. 2.The south 50 feet of the alley right-of-way must be retained as an access easement for the servicing of the dumpster located at the rear of Lot 6, Block 169,Original City of Little Rock,(southwest corner of the block). This access easement must not be fenced or obstructed in any way. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.The application was approved. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:Z-8123 Owner:Sharon Valdine Grant Applicant:Enoch Miller Location:12819 Kanis Road Area:1.00 Acre Request:Rezone from R-2 to 0-3 Purpose:Cosmetology School Existing Use:Duplex SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —VFW Post and undeveloped property (across Kanis Road); zoned R-2 South —Undeveloped property and single family residences;zoned 0-1,0-3 and R-2 East —Single family residence and undeveloped property;zoned 0-1 and C-3 West —Undeveloped property;zoned 0-3 A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1.Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. 2.With future development,the property owner will be required to improve Kanis Road to the Master Street Plan standard including curb, gutter,sidewalks and drainage improvements. B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. C.P U BLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified,and the Gibralter Heights/Pointe November 9,2006 ITEM NO:2 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8123 West/Timber Ridge and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D.LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property.The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-2 Single Family to 0-3 General Office District. Based on the existing zoning and use pattern,the proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan,which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan.A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Kanis since it is a Minor Arterial.This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. ~Hi I Pl Existing or proposed Class I,II or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. E.STAFF ANALYSIS: Sharon Valdine Grant,owner of the 1.00 acre property located at 12819 Kanis Road,is requesting to rezone the property form "R-2"Single Family District to "0-3"General Office District.The rezoning is proposed to allow use of the existing building as a cosmetology school. There is currently a one-story frame duplex structure located near the center of the property.There are two (2)gravel drives from Kanis Road which serve as access to the property.There is a one-car carport on each side of the residential structure. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:2 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-8123 The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning.A VFW post and undeveloped property (zoned R-2)are located across Kanis Road to the north.A single family residence is located on the 0-1 property immediately east,with undeveloped C-3 zoned property further east at the southwest corner of Kanis Road and Pointe West Drive.Undeveloped 0-3 zoned property is located immediately to the west.Undeveloped 0-3 and 0-1 property is located to the south,with single family residences further south. The City's Future Land Use Plan designates this property as "Suburban Office".The requested 0-3 zoning does not require an amendment to the Land Use Plan. Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning.Staff views the request as reasonable.The properties immediately east and west of the site are zoned 0-1 and 0-3 respectively.These existing 0-1 and 0-3 zonings wrap around to the south side of the site.Staff believes rezoning this one (1) acre to 0-3 and continuing the zoning and use pattern in this immediate area will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested 0-3 rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.The application was approved. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:Z-3476-A NAME:Best Car Wash —Conditional Use Permit LOCATION:2801 West Markham Street OWNER/APPLICANT:Best Ever Group/Ron Keeling PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of a new,two-tunnel,automatic car wash on this C-3 zoned property. 1.SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the south side of West Markham Street; between Woodrow and Pearl Streets. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located within the small Stifft Station commercial node, which is located along Markham Street,at Kavanaugh.Commercially zoned properties are located to the east,west,south and northwest.The Arkansas Schools for the Blind and Deaf are located across Markham,to the north.Staff believes replacing the existing four-bay self-serve car wash with the proposed two-bay automatic car wash will benefit the neighborhood. All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and the Hillcrest and Capitol View —Stifft Station Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.The Capitol View —Stifft Station Neighborhood membership has expressed support for the proposal. 3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The site currently has single curb cuts onto Woodrow and Pearl Streets and two curb cuts onto Markham.Under the proposal,the site will have a single,enter-only,driveway off of Markham and a single,exit-only, driveway onto Pearl.There is no need for on-site parking since there are no vacuums. 4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Site plan must comply with the City's minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:3 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3476-A Screening is required to be a six (6)foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward,a wall,or dense evergreen plantings,along the southern property line. Along eastern and the western property lines a minimum of nine foot wide landscape buffer is required.The landscape ordinance will also require this area to be a minimum of six foot nine inches.Approval is required from the City Beautiful Commission for a variance from this minimal requirement.A variance is required for the perimeter landscaping which is located in the right-of-way on the north,east and west perimeters.A franchise agreement must be obtained for any landscaping located within the public right-of-way.Contact John Barr are 371-4646. 5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1.Due to site constraints,driveway locations are approved as shown on plan if ROW dedications requirements have been satisfied. 2.Woodrow Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street.A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be required. 3.The proposed land use would classify Pearl Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 4.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Woodrow and Markham Street. 5.Sidewalk on the southeast corner must be within the ROW or placed in a sidewalk easement. 6.A franchise permit must be obtained for all improvements proposed to be located in the ROW. 6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater:Sewer available to this property. Entergy:No Comments received. CenterPoint Energy:No Comments received. AT8T (SBC):No Comments received. Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional meter(s)are required. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:3 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3476-A Fire Department:No Comments received. County Planning:No Comments. CATA:The site is located on CATA Bus Routes ¹1 and ¹8. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(OCTOBER 9,2006) Mike Berg was present representing the applicant.Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding building design,signage, fencing,hours of operation and trash collocation.The applicant was advised to submit a revised site plan that more clearly indicated the property lines and was to a proper scale.Staff noted the site plan did not reflect the required right-of- way dedication.Landscape Comments were discussed.It was noted that City Beautiful Commission approval and a franchise would be required since 100%of the street perimeter landscaping was in the right-of-way. The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by October 25,2006.The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The C-3 zoned lot located at 2801 West Markham Street is occupied by a four- bay,self-service car wash with vacuum islands.The building has reduced setbacks on all perimeters.There is virtually uncontrolled access to the site,with curb cuts onto Woodrow,Pearl and two curb cuts onto Markham. The applicant proposes to completely redevelop the site for a two-bay automatic car wash.All of the existing structures will be removed with the exception of the equipment room.The new structure will accommodate two,side-by-side, automatic car wash tunnels.The new structure will have an exterior finish of CMU block and will have a 6/12 pitched,metal roof.A large window on the Markham Street facade will allow viewing into the car wash tunnel.Signage is proposed on the east and west gable ends of the building.No additional signage is proposed.Access to the site will be completely redesigned;with a single, entry-only driveway off of Markham and a single,exit-only driveway onto Pearl. New sidewalks and perimeter landscaping will be installed along all three streets. New screening fencing and the existing equipment room will provide screening along the south perimeter.The car wash will be open 7 days a week,24 hours a day.There will be no dumpster on the site.All trash and debris will be picked up by a maintenance person on a daily basis.There will be no vacuums on the site. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:3 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3476-A Staff is supportive of the proposed C.U.P.The applicant has done a good job of siting the car wash on a very small property.Staff believes replacing the self- serve car wash with the automatic car wash will benefit the neighborhood. There are several variances associated with the development;including reduced driveway spacing,reduced building setbacks and allowing the street buffer and landscaping to be within the right-of-way.Due to the small size of the site,it could not be redeveloped without the variances.Staff supports the variance requests. To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues.The applicant submitted responses to issues raised at Subdivision Committee.There is no bill of assurance issue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the C.U.P.subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1.Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. 2.All site lighting is to be shielded downward and into the site. 3.The site is to be cleaned of trash and debris on a daily basis. 4.A franchise is to be obtained to allow any improvements located in the right- of-way. 5.City Beautiful Commission approval to allow landscaping in the right-of-way and to permit low growing landscaping along the street perimeter as requested by Public Works. Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow reduced driveway spacing, reduced building setbacks and to allow the perimeter buffers and landscaping to be located in the right-of-way. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and recommended approval subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved;including the variances.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:Z-4457-B NAME:Verizon Wireless —Tower Use Permit LOCATION:14000 Otter Creek Parkway OWNER/APPLICANT:Otter Creek Homeowner's Association/ Bracewell-Giuliani PROPOSAL:A tower use permit is requested to allow for construction of a wireless communication facility with a 150 foot tall support structure on this R-2 zoned, 40'40'ract. 1.SITE LOCATION: The proposed tower site is located at the rear of the Otter Creek Homeowners'ssociation property,between the tennis courts and Calleghan Branch. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The tower site is relatively hidden at the rear of the association property. The property drops off from the tennis courts down to the level where the tower is to be located.The tower is to be located adjacent to a maintenance building.There are many mature trees around the tower site,which will help to reduce the visual impact of the tower.It is 150+ feet from the base of the tower site to the rear property line of the residences to the east and 300+feet to the new subdivision developing across Calleghan Branch to the north.Staff believes the tower site could be made more compatible with the neighborhood by utilizing stealth design and by planting fast-growing evergreen trees and shrubs around portions of the site. All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Otter Creek,Crystal Valley and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: Access to the site is from an existing,gravel service drive off of Otter Creek Parkway.The driveway parallels the creek and extends to the maintenance building.There is adequate parking on the site to accommodate the occasional maintenance person who will visit the site. November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4457-B 4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS: A variance is requested from the WCF landscape requirements,which are as follows: (1)All existing and new WCF shall be screened and landscaped as follows: a.All WCF subject to this section shall contain a permanent six- foot landscape strip parallel with all sides of the primary use area and outside of the opaque fence but within the lease area, except for a space for ingress and egress to the primary use area. b.An eight-foot opaque fence shall be constructed,finished side facing outward,around the primary use area to provide screening and a background for required landscaping within the six-foot landscape strip. c.The opaque fence shall also satisfy the security fence requirement of subsection (f). d.The landscape strip on each side of the primary use area shall be planted with two (2)trees of a two-inch caliper which will grow to a spacing fifteen (15)feet which will grow to a minimum twenty (20)feet in height at maturity.Each landscape strip shall also be planted with evergreen shrubs of thirty (30)inches height at planting,with a maximum spacing of forty-eight (48) inches on center and which will grow to a minimum height of sixty (60)inches at maturity. (2)Existing mature trees shall be retained within the six-foot landscape strip and all leased or owned areas outside the primary use area except for reasonable ingress and egress. (3)Existing vegetation within a WCF site may be used in lieu of required landscaping when approved by the Planning Commission for TUP applications or by staff in other WCF applications. (4)The permanent six-foot landscape strip required by this section shall be maintained in such a manner as to assure that vegetation grows to mature height.Any planting within the strip shall be replaced if dead or diseased.Replacement vegetation shall be the minimum number,type and size required in this section. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4457-B 5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1.The proposed location appears to be in the 100-year floodplain. Provide survey showing the site in relation to the floodplain and floodway delineations. 2.If site is in the floodplain,a grading permit in accordance with section 29-186(c)and (d)will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site.Site grading,and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 3.If site is in the floodplain,a special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Sec.8-283 prior to construction. 4.If the site is in the floodplain,the finished floor of the building and mechanical equipment must be constructed 1 foot above the base flood elevation.The minimum finish floor elevation is required to be shown on plat and grading plans. 6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater:Sewer main in close proximity to site.Contact Little Rock Waste Water Utility prior to construction. Entergy:No Comments received. CenterPoint Energy:No Comments received. AT8T (SBC):No Comments received. Water:No objection. Fire Department:No Comments received. County Planning:No Comments. CATA:The site is not located on a CATA bus route. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(OCTO B E R 1 9,2006) The applicant was present.Staff presented the item and noted there was little additional information needed.Staff asked the applicant to clarify what type of fencing was proposed on the perimeters of the site.Staff also noted the tower 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4457-B would have to be designed to accommodate 2 more carriers.Staff noted the requested variances for tower setbacks and perimeter screening and landscaping.Public Works staff requested a survey showing the site in relation to the floodplain and floodway.Utility and other agency comments were noted. The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by October 25,2006.The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: Verizon Wireless is requesting approval of a Tower Use Permit to allow for construction of a Wireless Communication Facility (WCF)consisting of a 150 foot tall support structure (tower)and associated ground equipment within a 40 foot by 40 foot parcel located at 14000 Otter Creek Parkway.The WCF is located near the rear of the Homeowner's Association property,between the tennis courts and Callaghan Branch.The WCF is to be located adjacent to a maintenance building.Several mature trees surround the site.From staff's inspection of the site,it appears only one or two smaller trees may need to be removed to accommodate the WCF. A tower use permit is necessary because there are variances associated with the proposed WCF.The 40 foot by 40 foot lease area was actually deeded to the Homeowners'ssociation by Otter Creek Land Company under a separate deed. The leased tract is zoned R-2 as is the surrounding property.Technically,the 150 foot tall tower should sit at least 150 feet away from the property line of the abutting residentially zoned property.This is impossible since the tract measures only 40'40'.The tower is actually located 150+feet away from the residentially occupied property adjacent to the west and 300+feet from the residential subdivision being developed to the north. Because of the site's location on a wooded area and due to security concerns, the applicant is proposing to enclose the compound with a chain-link security fence rather than a solid screening fence and to not install the ordinance dictated landscaping.The applicant is willing to install screening shrubs on the west and south perimeters of the site to help screen the compound.The typical landscape and screening requirements for a WCF are as follow: (1)All existing and new WCF shall be screened and landscaped as follows: a.All WCF subject to this section shall contain a permanent six-foot landscape strip parallel with all sides of the primary use area and outside of the opaque fence but within the lease area,except for a space for ingress and egress to the primary use area. 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4457-B b.An eight-foot opaque fence shall be constructed,finished side facing outward,around the primary use area to provide screening and a background for required landscaping within the six-foot landscape strip. c.The opaque fence shall also satisfy the security fence requirement of subsection (f). d.The landscape strip on each side of the primary use area shall be planted with two (2)trees of a two-inch caliper which will grow to a spacing of fifteen (15)feet which will grow to a minimum twenty (20)feet in height at maturity.Each landscape strip shall also be planted with evergreen shrubs of thirty (30)inches height at planting,with a maximum spacing of forty-eight (48)inches on center and which will grow to a minimum height of sixty (60)inches at maturity. (2)Existing mature trees shall be retained within the six-foot landscape strip and all leased or owned areas outside the primary use area except for reasonable ingress and egress. (3)Existing vegetation within a WCF site may be used in lieu of required landscaping when approved by the Planning Commission for TUP applications or by staff in other WCF applications. (4)The permanent six-foot landscape strip required by this section shall be maintained in such a manner as to assure that vegetation grows to mature height.Any planting within the strip shall be replaced if dead or diseased. Replacement vegetation shall be the minimum number,type and size required in this section. Staff is supportive of the requested TUP.Staff believes there are additional conditions and modifications that should be applied to help lessen the visual impact of the WCF. The tower should be designed in "flagpole"style where the antennae array does not extend cut beyond the body of the tower.Fast growing evergreen trees and shrubs should be planted along the west,south and north perimeters of the WCF site to help provide some degree of year-round screening.It is important to protect and preserve as many of the mature trees around the site as possible. Prior to removal of any trees,those to be removed should be marked and confirmed by staff.The applicant should plant additional trees in the immediate vicinity,beyond those required for screening,to replace any trees to be removed. With these additional conditions,staff can support the TUP.To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues.There is no bill of assurance issue specifically pertinent to the WCF.The applicant submitted an updated survey showing the WCF to be located out of the floodplain. 5 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4457-B The tower is 150 feet tall,which complies with the Ordinance height limit.The lightning rod extends another 10 feet,which is permitted under the definition of WCF height. Section 36-593(c)(6)of the Code establishes the criteria for the Planning Commission to grant a deferral of the landscaping and screening requirements for a WCF and states the Commission may modify the deferral or impose the requirements if,in the future,a major change in circumstances occurs.A "major change in circumstances"means: 1.The area within two hundred (200)feet of the boundaries of the WCF tower site has developed to the point that there is a virtually unobstructed view of the tower site from any adjoining occupiable residential structure or from public property or right-of-way,and 2.The City has received a complaint from the owner of an occupiable structure located within two hundred (200)feet of the tower site that the site has insufficient landscaping or screening in place;and 3.The City has requested that the parties resolve the issue by agreeing to certain screening or landscaping requirements consistent with section 36-593 which be can be granted administratively by the director of planning and development,but no agreement has been reached,or sufficient additional space around the site has been acquired to meet the landscaping,setback and screening requirements of Section 36-593. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested TUP subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1.Compliance with the comments and conditions in Sections 5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. 2.Fast growing,evergreen trees and shrubs must be planted along the north, south and west perimeters of the WCF site. 3.Prior to the removal of any trees,those to be removed must be marked and confirmed by staff.Additional trees should be planted in the immediate vicinity around the WCF site,beyond those required for screening,to replace any trees that may be removed. 4.The support structure (tower)must be constructed in flagpole (stealth)style. 5.The support structure (tower)and lease area must be designed to accommodate at least two additional carriers. 6 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4457-B Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance and a deferral of the screening and landscaping provisions until a "major change in circumstance" as defined by Section 36-593(c)(6). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.Several letters and e-mails of opposition had been received by staff.Staff informed the Commission that,on November 7,2006,the applicant had requested deferral of the item to the February 1,2007 meeting to allow for further meetings with the neighborhood. A motion was made to waive the bylaws to accept the late deferral request.The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.The item was then placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the February 1, 2007 Agenda with a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 7 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:Z-6014-B NAME:Saddle Creek Church K-4 Preschool —Conditional Use Permit LOCATION:18020 Cantrell Road OWNER/APPLICANT:Saddle Creek Church PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow a K-4 Preschool program at this existing R-2 zoned church in conjunction with Little Rock Christian Academy. 1.SITE LOCATION: The property is located at the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Patrick Country Road. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The church is located in an area of mixed uses and zoning.A large area of C-3 zoned property is located across Patrick Country Road to the east, at The Ranch.Several smaller PCD zoned properties are located along Cantrell Road to the west.0-3 zoned property is adjacent to the north. Across Cantrell Road to the south are properties zoned R-2,0-1,and C-3. The church and the proposed small private school use are compatible with uses and zoning in the area. All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and the Aberdeen, Maywood Manor and Cheveaux Neighborhood Associations and the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: A 70+space parking lot is located on the front (south)portion of the site. Access is from single driveways onto Cantrell Road and Patrick Country Road.The private school use is Monday-Friday when the parking lot is least-used.The private school is to have an enrollment of 30 students with 4 teachers,requiring 7 parking spaces.There is more than adequate parking on the site to accommodate the use. 4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS: No Comments. November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6014-B 5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No Comments. 6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater:Sewer available to this property. Entergy:No Comments received. CenterPoint Energy:No Comments received. AT8T (SBC):No Comments received. Water:No objection. Fire Department:No Comments received. County Planning:No Comments. CATA:The site is located on the CATA Highway 10 Express Route. Plannin Division:No Comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(OCTO B E R 1 9,2006) The applicant was present.Staff presented the item and noted little additional information was needed.In response to a question from staff,the applicant stated there would be no additional signage on the site for the private school use. Staff noted Fire Marshall approval would be required.The applicant stated the Fire Marshall had already made an initial visit to the site as had a representative of the State DHHS. The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: Saddle Creek Church is located on the R-2 zoned,7.68+acre tract at 18020 Cantrell Road.Development on the site consists of several buildings,a playground and parking.The development is on the south half of the site with the north half of the property being wooded and undeveloped. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6014-B The Church is proposing to partner with Little Rock Christian Academy to host a K-4 Preschool Program on the church property.The school will utilize existing classroom space.No changes will be made to the property to accommodate the school.The program is proposed to have a maximum enrollment of 30 children with 4 teachers/assistants.The program is to meet weekdays beginning at 8:30 a.m.One class of approximately 15 children is to dismiss at 11:30a.m. The second class of approximately 15 children is to dismiss at 2:30 p.m.No additional signage will be placed on the site for the school use. To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues.The proposed use of classroom space within this existing church facility for a small private school use is compatible with uses and zoning in the area.All site improvements are in place and no changes are necessary to accommodate the added use.The Fire Marshall and State DHHS have already visited the site and no issues are anticipated.There is no bill of assurance for this unplatted acreage tract. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit as filed subject to Fire Marshall approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and recommended approval subject to Fire Marshall approval.There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:Z-6994-A Owner:City of Little Rock Parks and Recreation Applicant:City of Little Rock Parks and Recreation Location:Northeast corner of West 10"and Woodrow Streets and Northeast corner of West 10"and Appianway Streets Area:Approximately 1.09 Acres Request:Rezone from R-3 and 1-2 to PR Purpose:Expansion of Fletcher Park Existing Use:Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —Fletcher Park;zoned PR South —Single family residences and Arrow Bus Lines facility (across West 10"Street);zoned R-3 and l-2 East —Single family residences;zoned R-3 and l-2 West —Single family residences (across Woodrow Street);zoned R-3 A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No Comments. B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.Bus Route ¹3 (Baptist Medical Center Route)runs along West 12"Street to the south,and Route ¹17 (Mabelvale —Downtown Route)runs along l-630 to the north. C.P U BLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified,and the Capitol Hill and Pine to Woodrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. November 9,2006 ITEM NO:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6994-A D.LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the l-630 Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Park/Open Space for this property.The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-3 Single Family District and l-2 Light Industrial District to PR Park and Recreation District. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: West 10"Street is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan and Woodrow Street is shown as a Minor Arterial.The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties.A Minor arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area.These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. ~Hi I Pl Existing or proposed Class I,II,or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Stephens Neighborhood Action Plan.The Neighborhood Revitalization goal has specifically states there is a need for more parks and playgrounds in the area. E.STAFF ANALYSIS: The City of Little Rock Parks and Recreation,owner of the 0.79 acre property located at the northeast corner of West 10"and Woodrow Streets and the 0.30 acre property at the northeast corner of West 10"and Appianway Streets,is requesting to rezone the property from "R-3"Single Family District and "l-2"Light Industrial District to "PR"Park and Recreation District.The rezoning is proposed to allow for the expansion of Fletcher Park. The lots are currently vacant and mostly grass covered.There area a few mature trees on the property.There is a 20-foot wide platted alley right-of- way along the north property line. 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6994-A Fletcher Park (zoned PR)is located immediately north of the property,along the south side of Interstate 630.Single family residences are located south (across West 10"Street),east and west (across Woodrow Street)of the site.There is an Arrow Bus Lines office and maintenance facility at the southeast corner of West 10"and Appianway Street.There are other industrial-type uses located further to the east. The City's Future Land Use Plan designates this property as "Park/Open Space".The requested zoning change to PR does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Staff is supportive of the rezoning request.Staff views the requested zoning to PR to allow expansion of the Fletcher Park facilities as a very minor issue.Staff feels the expansion of Fletcher Park will be a great asset to the community and benefit the neighborhood for many years.Staff believes the requested rezoning will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested PR rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant contacted staff on October 30, 2006 requesting the application be deferred to the December 21,2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 21,2006 Agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Chenal Planning District Location:Either side of Kanis Rd,from Chenal Pkwy to Denny Road Receuest:Single Family,Multifamily,Public institutional ft Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family,Low Density Residential,Multifamily, Suburban Office,Neighborhood Commercial and Commercial Source:Staff PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District from Single Family, Multifamily,Public Institutional 8 Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family, Low Density Residential,Suburban Office,Neighborhood Commercial and Commercial.Single Family provides for single-family homes at densities not to exceed six units per acre.Low Density Residential accommodates a range of housing types including single-family attached and detached,duplex, townhomes,patio or garden homes and multifamily or a combination provided the overall density is between six and ten dwelling units per acre.Suburban Office provides for low intensity development of office or office parks in close proximity of lower density residential areas to assure compatibility. Neighborhood Commercial is limited to small-scale commercial development in close proximity to a neighborhood,providing goods and services to that neighborhood market.Commercial is a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products,personal and professional services,and general business activities. This package of changes was generated as a result of a City Board of Director's instruction to review the Land Use Plan in the Kanis Road corridor from Chenal Parkway to Stewart Road. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The properties involved in the amendment are mostly vacant either wooded or pasture land.There are three businesses on the properties as well as two homes.Of the approximately 78 acres included in the changes approximately 14 acres is zoned commercial (9.5 'C-1'eighborhood Commercial and 4.5 'C-3'eneralCommercial);6 acres is zoned office ('0-2'ffice and Institutional);19 acres multifamily ('MF-24'ultifamily District 24 units per acre)and 39 acres of single-family ('R-2'ingle Family).Northwest are single-family subdivisions and the Chenal Country Club,most of this area is zoned 'R-2n Single Family.To the west and south are single-family homes generally in subdivisions of 5 to 10 acres November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 lots.The land is generally zoned 'R-2'.Northeast of the area is zoned 'C-2'hoppingCenter,'MF-24'nd 'MF-18'ultifamily zoning,'0-2'ffice and Institutional.The closest tracts are wooded,however further to the northeast is developed with office buildings,and commercial centers.To the east is 'C-3'eneralCommercialand'PCD'lanned Commercial District.This land is currently wooded or former pastureland.Further to the east along Chenal Parkway are car dealerships;a shopping center and small commercial buildings also zoned Planned Commercial District or 'C-3'. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: August 15,2006,Three Land Use Plan amendment packages were approved. These amendments changed Single Family,Low Density Residential, Multifamily,Mixed Use,Neighborhood Commercial and Office areas to Single Family,Mixed Use,Office Neighborhood Commercial,Commercial and Mixed Office/Commercial.The changes were in areas to the north and northeast of this proposed amendment package continuing along Rahling Road.The changes were made to allow for future development and some were related to reclassifications of the land. June 27,2006 a change was made from Office,Neighborhood Commercial and Low Density Residential to Mixed Office Commercial approximately a mile to the northeast of this amendment package east of Kirk Road and north of Chenal Parkway.The changes resulted from a Planned Commercial reclassification to allow for future development. May 18,2004,a change from Single Family to Office,south of Cantrell Road between Chenonceau and Chevaux,over two miles to the north of the site.This change was made related to a Planned Office reclassification to allow for future redevelopment of the land. January 20,2004,a change from Office to Mixed Use south of Rahling Road either side of Champlin Drive,over a mile to the northeast of the application area. This change was made to allow for future development of the land (no reclassification was included). June 17,2003,changes from Office,Multifamily and Single Family to Multifamily and Low Density Residential south of Chenal Parkway around Rahling Road, north of the application area.These changes were made to reflect new zoning in the area for future development. June 4,2002,a change from Single Family to Suburban Office south of Cantrell Road either side of Drew,over two miles to the north of the site.This change 2 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 was made related to a Planned Office District reclassification to allow for future redevelopment of the land. The Land Use Plan in this area generally reflects the existing land use with only minor changes.This is common for the areas outside the city limits.The Plan shows a small amount of Commercial use at the proposed intersection of Kanis Road with the 'West Loop'.Multifamily is shown as a transition from this Commercial to the Single Family surrounding.A large Public Institutional use area is shown to the north of this use grouping.The proposal had been for a hospital or school complex at this site.A second Public Institutional use area is shown along Kanis just east of Rock Creek.This too was to have been a school site.A small area of Neighborhood Commercial is also shown at the Stewart- Kanis-Denny Roads intersection.To the south,west and northwest is shown for Single Family.To the northeast across Rock Creek is generally shown for intense development Commercial and Office with some Multifamily. MASTER STREET PLAN: Kanis Road,Denny Road,Stewart Road,and the Proposed West Loop (Rahling- Edswood)are shown as Arterials on the plan.The primary purpose of an Arterial is to move vehicles and goods in and through the area.Direct access to these roads should be limited if provided at all.These roads are not currently built to standard,additional right-of-way and pavement are likely to be required with future developments. BICYCLE PLAN: A Class I Route is shown along Kanis Road,east of the West Loop and along the West Loop.Class I routes have a separate paved area from the motorized traffic and may parallel the street.If included with the sidewalk,the resulting pathway must be wide enough for both uses on both sides of the roadway.A Class II route is shown along Kanis Road,west of the West Loop.A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5-foot shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan indicates that most of the area included in this amendment is within 8-blocks of a public or private outdoor recreation area.It should be noted that there is a portion,which does not meet this standard.Additional recreational and outdoor space opportunities in this general area should be pursued based on the Plan. 3 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. ANALYSIS: The initiative to review the Land Use Plan along Kanis Road from Chenal Parkway to Stewart Road was at the request of the Little Rock Board of Directors.This was made as the result of a Land Use Plan amendment just west of Chenal Parkway on the north side of Kanis Road to Commercial from Multifamily.Staff had been opposed to this change in part due to a concern it could lead to further commercial requests along Kanis,making Kanis lined with commercial from Chenal Parkway to at least the alignment of the proposed West Loop.The Board of Directors recognized that even though they felt the requested change should be made that Staff's concerns should be addressed. As a result,Staff was instructed to work with the Little Rock Planning Commission to develop a revised Plan to address Staff's concern about further commercialization of Kanis Road. Staff developed several options and presented these to the Plans Committee of the Little Rock Planning Commission.Two options were developed to present to the full Planning Commission.This was done at an Informal meeting of the Little Rock Planning.About this time several requests were made to amend the Land Use Plan in the vicinity,mostly to the north.The Planning Commission instructed staff to work with the Plans Committee and review the impacts of the requested changes with the corridor study underway.This was done and presentations on the various Land Use Plan Amendments were made to the Commission and City Board of Directors in the spring of 2006. The Land Use Plan study recommendation was developed and distributed to the affected property owners for comment.From this a final package was developed,which is now presented to the Planning Commission for consideration. The amendment area is outside the city limits of Little Rock but adjacent to the south and southwest.The major growth corridor of the City has been immediately to the northeast of the amendment area.New subdivisions have 4 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 been built during the last ten years to the northwest and northeast within the city. In addition,many large-lot (5 to 10 acre tract)subdivisions have been developed to the south,west and southwest outside the City of Little Rock. The overall development pattern has been set for the vicinity.That is moderate density north of Kanis Road with lower density development south of Kanis Road.Staff believes this is not just a current situation but also the likely future development pattern for the area.South of Kanis the land has been subdivided into tracts of five acres or more with large high-end homes constructed on each lot.This investment means that a major change is not likely.To the north are subdivisions of more suburban nature within the large 'Chenal'evelopment. Even with the possibility of annexation in the future only limited densification is likely to the south of Kanis Road.Any change in use along Kanis Road with new development should be done in a manner that is sensitive to this development pattern both to the north and south of the road. The Plans Committee indicated that with the difficulty of getting multifamily development in many areas,areas already zoned for multifamily within the study area should not be changed if at all possible.This along with the density issue and the Board's guidance to prevent a commercial 'strip'ere the over arching principles used to guide the study. There are two large Public Institutional use areas shown on the Plan within the study area.Neither is developed at this time.This is not the standard practice of the City.That is the City only shows Public Institutional when the use exists or is about to develop.These two areas were shown on a Plan done by a private consultant for the City.Based on common practice of the City these two areas were determined to be areas where changes should be proposed. One Public Use area is east of Rock Creek along the south side of Kanis Road. All of the remaining land east of Rock Creek on the Plan is Commercial or Mixed Office Commercial.The zoning is currently Planned Commercial Districts, 'R-2'ingle Family and a small area of 'C-3'eneral Commercial at the intersection with Chenal Parkway.Remembering the density issue,Staff and the Plans committee recommendation was for this area to be Suburban Office.This recognizes that the areas east of the creek are non-residential while attempting to 'step-down'n intensity as one moves west and south. The second Public use area on the Plan within the study area is along the alignment of the West Loop,likely to be Rahling Road extended,to the north of Kanis Road.This land is mostly in one ownership and is zoned MF-24,MF-18 (both multifamily zonings:one 18-units per acre,the other 24-units per acre)with some '0-2'ffice and Institutional zoning.The zoning pattern is based on the proposed alignments of Rahling Road,La Grande Drive and Champagnolle 5 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 Drive.All are Collectors or Arterials on the City Master Street Plan.The zoning pattern has been in place for approximately twenty years.Using the principle to maintain existing Multifamily zoned areas and increased density north of Kanis Road,the proposal became to change most of the area to Multifamily with a small area changed to Suburban Office (the Champagnolle-Rahling intersection). The commercial node at the intersection of Kanis Road with the West Loop was designed to be small.The major commercial was and is to be at Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway.When looking at the zoning and ownership pattern along the south side of Kanis it was determined that only a minor change was possible. This was to recognize the ownership with a large single-family home.Most of the tract is shown for Single Family and there is a large home on the site.The Multifamily had been shown as a transition from the commercial node to the single-family.Keeping in mind the lower density guide,the proposal is to remove the multifamily from the Plan for the southwest quadrant and show only Single Family for this area. On the north side of the 'node'he existing zoning and use goes beyond the current Commercial area into the area shown for Multifamily.Thus a change to expand the 'node'o more accurately display areas already committed to future commercial uses is proposed.A large amount of Low Density Residential is added to the northwest of the 'node'.This is to provide a transition and reflect the increase in density to the north of Kanis Road. At the Denny-Kanis Road intersection is a Neighborhood Commercial Node.The proposal is to enlarge the node along the north side of Denny.This expansion more accurately reflects the already existing 'C-1 'eighborhood Commercial. There is one commercial use already in place at this intersection within the area proposed,which is only partially currently shown for Neighborhood Commercial. Also at this node,at the southwest corner of Stewart and Kanis Road an area is shown going to Single Family from Neighborhood Commercial.This reflects a recent request to split a tract for two single-family homes. In general,the package attempts to more accurately reflect the currently and likely future use pattern based on the zoning and currently use pattern.In addition the principals of maintaining existing zoned multifamily areas,removing non-developed Public Use areas and protecting the low density single-family areas to the south were used to develop an overall package for the corridor. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations.Staff has received no comments from area residents at the time of this writing. 6 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:LU06-19-07 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the changes are appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to December 21,2006 to allow Staff time to review new information.By a vote of 9 for,0 against (Rahman,Allen absent)the consent agenda was approved. 7 November 9,2006 ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:LU06-19-08 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Chenal Planning District Location:South of Cantrell Road,east of Joe T.Robinson school Recluest:Low Density Residential,Suburban Office,and Single Family to Mixed Office Commercial Source:Tim Daters,White-Daters 8 Associates,Inc. PROPOSAL /REQUEST: The applicant has requested that this item be deferred to the December 21,2006 agenda.Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral at the request of the applicant to December 21,2006.By a vote of 9 for,0 against (Rahman,Allen absent)the consent agenda was approved. November 9,2006 ITEM NO:9 SUBJECT:Planning Commission receipt and acceptance of a proposed ordinance amendment package for 2006;directing the Plans Committee to proceed with review and forwarding the results of that review for public hearing. STAFF REPORT: The subjects in this proposal were offered by staff and citizens over the past several months.If the Commission accepts this material as the 2006 Work Program for ordinance amendments,staff will immediately distribute the material to contact persons.Comments received will be forwarded to the Plans Committee for inclusion within the discussion. Once the Plans Committee completes its review,the completed package will be returned to the Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 28,2006) Staff presented the proposed amendment package and recommended that the Commission set the public hearing for November 9,2006.There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF REPORT: The package of proposed amendments was reviewed by the Plans Committee at its October 4,October 18 and November 1,2006 meetings.Upon the advice of the City Attorney,the proposal to allow for consideration of compatibility when reviewing preliminary plats has been dropped.Otherwise,with relatively minor changes,the proposed package is as was presented to the Commission on September 28,2006.Staff recommends the Commission set December 21, 2006 as the public hearing date,with notification to the neighborhood associations and ordinance amendment contact list. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 9,2006) Staff presented the proposed amendment package and recommended that the Commission set the public hearing for December 21,2006,with notice to neighborhood associations and the ordinance amendment contact list.There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. AMKXBMEXT PROP()SKI S ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE 2QO6 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PROPOSALS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 ~Sub act ~Pdorit A.t-tean-up matter to move "Retaii uses not listed 3(enclosed)u from conditional use to permitted use in the C-2 Shopping Centel Dlstnct. Et.Ciean-up matter to add "food store"as a permitted use in the C-2 Shopping Center District. C.Clean-up matter to correct the required number of votes 5 required for action by the Board of Zoning Adjustment. D.A proposal to allow fence coiurnns or supports to exceed 6 the allowable height of a fence. E.A proposal to allow single family and two-family 7residencesaspermittedusesintheR-5 Urban Residence Distr ict. F.A proposal to require the submittal of information in an 8 electronic format for subdivision/multiple building site plan review applications. G.A proposal to provide a procedure for variances from the 9 criteria of the Central City Design Overlay District. H.A proposal to move the responsibility for reviewing 'I 0 development of Parks and Recreation to the Parks and Recreation Commission. A proposal to require screening of vehicles in parking 12 structures in the Urban Use District. Priority: (1)Urgent need (2)Need 3 Text Cleanup can walt. Page ZONING AND SUHDVISION ORDINANCE 2006 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PROPOSALS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 ~Sub ect ~FliQI It J.A proposal to allow the Planning Commission to approve 13variancesfromtheprovisionsoftheSubdivision Ordinance with appeals to the Hoard of Directors. K.A proposal to amend the definition of building height.16 Priority: (1)Urgent need (2)Need 3 Text Cleanu can wait. Page 2 2006 PROPOSED ORDlNANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PROBLEM:Clean-u matter to move "Retail SOURCE:Staff uses not listed enclosed "from conditional use to ermitted use in the C-2 Sho in Center District. CURRENT ORDlNANCE LANGUAGE: "Retail uses not listed (enclosed)"is listed as a conditional use in the C-2 District;Section 36-300(c)(2)1. STAFF REPORT:() The C-2 zoning district is established to provide for regional scale shopping facilities,It is intended to serve the broad commercial needs of the community,yet the current list of permitted retail uses is somewhat limited.The use listing "retail uses not listed (enclosed)"should be moved from conditional uses to permitted Llses. SUGGESTED TEXT:( Amend Section 36-300(c)(2)to remove "retail uses not listed (enclosed)out of the C-2 conditional use list and amend Section 36-300(c)(1)to add the use as a permitted use in C-2. Page 3 2006 PROPGSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PRGHLEM:Clean-u matter to add "food store"SGURCE:Staff as a ermitted use in the C-2 Sho in Center District. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: "Food store"is not listed as either a permitted or conditional use in the C-2 Shopping Center District. STAFF REPORT:() The C-2 zoning district is established to provide for regional scale shopping facilities.It is intended to serve the broad commercial needs of the community.The current use listing in the C-2 district does not include "Food store". SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 36-3GG(c)(1)to add "food store"as a permitted use. Page 4 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PROHLEM:Clean-u matter to correct the SOuRCE:Staff le ulled number of votes re ulled fol action b the H oa rd of Zonin Ad'ustment. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: Sec.36-69(c) (c)F'rohihitions.The board shall not permit as a variance any use in a district that is not permitted in this chapter,nor shall the board make any changes in this chapter,The concurring vote of five (5)members of the board shall be necessary to reverse any order,requirement,decision or determination of the administrator,or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which it is required to pass under this chapter,or to affect any variation in this chapter. STAFF REPORT:() On February 3,1998,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.17,667 reducing the membership of the Board of Zoning Adjustment from 9 persons to 5.Section 36-69(c)was not amended to reflect the reduction in membership.The current language states 5 votes are required for action by the Board,as if it were still a 9-member board,The correct number of votes required should be 3;a majority of the now5-member board. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 36-69(c)to read as follows: (c)F'rohihitions.The board shall not permit as a variance any use in a district that is not permitted in this chapter,nor shall the board make any changes in this chapter.T'e concurring vote of three (3)members of the board shall be necessary to reverse any order,requirement,decision or determination of the administrator,or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which it is required to pass under this chapter,or to affect any variation in this chapter. Page 5 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PROBLEM:A ro osal to allow fence columns SOURCE:Staff or su ort osts to exceed the allowable hei ht Qf a fence. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: The current language of the fence regulations in Section 36-5'I6 does not permit columns or support posts to exceed the allowable fence height. STAFF REPORT:() Section 36-5'l6 establishes the maximum fence height for residential,office,commercial and industrial sites.There is no provision in that section to allow columns or support posts to exceed the allowable height.Staff suggests allowing the columns or support posts to extend up to 2 feet above the fence height.S'taff Is also pl'Gposlng a maximum width ancl mlnlmum sepal ation fol the colulTlns and support posts. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 36-516(e)general provisions to add a new subsection (7)to read: (7)Support columns or support posts shall be permitted to exceed the allowable fence or wall height by no more than two (2)feet,including any ornamental features.Support columns or support posts shall have a maximum width of two (2)feet.There shall be a minimum distance of seven feet —six inches(7'6")between opposing faces of support columns or support posts which exceed the allowable fence or wall height,other than at gates or corners. Page 6 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PROBLEM:Pro osal to allow sin le famil and SOURCE;Staff two-famil residences as ermitted uses in the R-5 Urban Residence District. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: Sec.36-259(b)('I) (1)Permitted uses. a.Housing,elderly,not to exceed R-5 density. b.Multifamily residential structures not to exceed thirty-six (36)units per gross acre. C.Orphanage. d.Rooming,lodging and boarding facilities. STAFF REPORT:() There are numerous R-5 zoned lots scattered throughout the Central City,South End and Hillcrest Neighborhoods.Many of these are currently occupied by single family residences.Many others are vacant and staff believes it is appropriate to permit the possible redevelopment of these sites as single family or two-family.The typical R-5 lot is 50'140'n size and is similar to the R-3 Single Family andR-4 Two-Family lots located east of University Avenue. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 36-259(b)(1)to add new Subsections e.and f.to read as follows: e.One single family dwelling on any lot or parcel. f.One two-family dwelling on any lot or parcel. Page 7 2006 PROPOSED ORDiNANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November I 2006 PROBLEM:Pro osed chan e to hei staff SOURCE:Staff better work with received subdivision/multi le buildin site lan review data re uirin data to be submitted in an electronic format. CURRENT ORDiNANCE LANGUAGE: Section 31 -13(c) Submittal requirements.The following materials are the minimum criteria for submittal.Failure to disclose any of this material or provide on a site plan may be cause for withdrawal or deferral of application.Minimum submittal site plan review information shall be submitted on or accompanied byaboundarysurvey,not larger than twenty-four (24)inches by thirty-six (36)inches and including: STAFF REPORT:() The proposed change will give staff and the Commission access to data in a more readily usable format and is the same change recently made for submittal requirements for preliminary plats and zoning site plan reviews. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 31-13(c)submittal requirements to read as follows: Submittal requirements.The following materials are the minimum criteria for submittal.Failure to disclose any of this material or to provide the material on a site plan may be cause for withdrawal or deferral of the application.Minimum submittal site plan review information shall be submitted on or accompanied by a boundary survey,not larger than twenty-four (24)inches by thirty-six (36)inches and including all information listed below: A site plan shall also be submitted in an electronic format compatible with equipment in the planning and development department of the city.The data shall be in CAD compatible .DXF or .DWG (compatible with software available in the planning and development department of the city) format containing all information listed below in separate layers. Page 8 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PROBLEM:Provide a rocedure for variances SOURCE:Staff from the criteria of the Central Cit Redevelo ment Corridor Desi n Gverla District. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: Sec.36-372.Exceptions. Requests for new construction that do not comply with the design regulations of this section as determined by staff may be appealed to the board of adjustment pursuant to Article II,Division 2 of the Zoning Ol dlnance. STAFF REPORT:( The Central City Redevelopment Corridor Design Overlay District was created following the 1 999 tornado.The DQD covers a small corridor that mirrors the tornado's path of destruction and was created to assure that new construction would be compatible with the existing neighborhood.There was no clear method created for any variance from or modification of the criteria.The existing language only permits an appeal to determine if staff is correctly interpreting the provisions of the section. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Sec.36-372.Exceptions. Any request to vary,alter or modify specifications of this design overlay district shall be processed as a request for a variance as per Article II Division 2 of this chapter. Page 9 2QQ6 PRGPGSED GRDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2Q06 PROBLEM:Move res onsibilit for reviewin SGURCE:Staff develo ment of Parks and Recreation zoned ro erties from the Plannin Commission to the Parks and Recreation Commission. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: Section 36-322.Ib)(4) The city departments of planning and development,parks and recreation,and public works shall present any plans for the development of a property within the PR park and recreation district to the planning commission at a public meeting and shall demonstrate that the proposed development,or redevelopment,plans are consistent with the goals expressed in the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan.This presentation is for information purposes only,and no formal action is required unless a majority of the members of the planning commission vote to approve a motion that states: a.That the city staff is in error;and b.The proposed plan is totally inconsistent with goals and vision of the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan;and c.That the city board of directors should review the presented plan to determine if it is consistent with the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan;and d.If such an affirmative vote is taken,provides to the city board of directors a written list of the reasons that a majority of the members of the planning commission believe that the proposal is inconsistent with the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Page 'IO 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 STAFF REPORT:() The PR parks and recreation zoning district was created on January 16,2001 by passage of Ordinance No.18,419.Subsequently,all City owned parks properties were rezoned from various districts to PR. On January 15,2002,the PR district regulations were amended by Ordinance No.18,630,The amendment allowed for multiple structures by-right on PR zoned properties and allowed "informational only"review by the Planning Commission.No action is required by the Commission unless the Commission finds that City staff is in error and the proposed development is totally inconsistent with the goals and vision of the City's Master Parks Plan. On January 7,2003,the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Commission was created by the passage of Ordinance No.18,803.This eleven (11)member Commission meets once a month and has specific duties and responsibilities which are outlined in Chapter 2 of the Code of Ordinances;including the r evlew of speclflc pal k pr o]ects. Staff believes it is now appropriate to remove that responsibility from the Planning Commission. Establishment of PR zoned properties through the City's land use plan and zoning will continue to be the responsibility of the Planning Commission and Hoard of Directors. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 36-322.(b)(4)to read as follows: (4)The city staff shall present any plans for the development of a property within the PR park and recreation district to the parks and recreation commission at a public meeting and shall demonstrate that the proposed development,or redevelopment,plans are consistent with the goals expressed in the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan.This presentation is for information purposes only,and no formal action is required unless a majority of the members of the parks and recreation commission vote to approve a motion that states: a.That the city staff is in error;and b.The proposed plan is totally inconsistent with goals and vision of the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan;and c.That the city board of directors should review the presented plan to determine if it is consistent with the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan;and d.lf such an affirmative vote is taken,provides to the city board of directors a written list of the reasons that a majority of the members of the parks and recreation commission believe that the proposal is inconsistent with the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Page 2GG6 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 'I 2GG6 PROBLEM:Pro osed chan e to re uire SOURCE:Staff screenin of vehicles in arkin decks within the ULI Urban Use district. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: There currently is no ordinance language. STAFF REPORT:( There is no provision in the Urban Use zoning district regulations to require screening of vehicles parked in a parking deck.Due to the diverse nature of development in downtown,including residential and historic uses.Staff believes it is appropriate to require a screening wall on each level of a parking deck three feet in height. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Amend Section 36-342.1(c)(10)to add a new Subsection c.to read as follows: c.An opaque screening wall no less than three (3)feet in height shall be placed on the exterior perimeter of each level of all parking structures.The screening wall shall extend above the finished tloor of each level of the parking structure so as to screen vehicles parked in the parking structure. Page 12 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2QQ6 PROBLEM:Pro osaI to allow the Plannin SOURCE:Staff Commission to a rove variances from the rovisions of the subdivision ordinance with 8 Bals to tha Boarcl af Dllectols. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: Sec.33 -3 2.Variances. (aI Generally.The rules and regulations set forth in this chapter are the standard requirements of the city.Where the applicant alleges that extraordinary hardships or practical difficulties may result from strict compliance with these regulations,or the purpose of these regulations may be served to a greater extent by an alternative proposal,the planning staff and the planning commission shall review such requests for variances and the staff and commission shall forward its recommendation to the board of directors for final action so that substantial justice may be done and the public interest secured.Such variances,however,shall not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of these regulations. The following criteria shall be used to determine whether a variance shall be granted: (1)The conditions upon which the request for variance is based are unique to the propertybecauseofitsparticularphysicalsurroundings,shape or topographical conditions. (2)The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public safety,health or welfare, or injurious to other property. (3)The variance will not in any manner vary the provisions of the zoning ordinance. (b)Procedures and conditions.No variance shall be granted except upon wntten petition by the subdivder when the preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the planning commission.The petition shall state fully the grounds for the application and all of the facts upon which the petitton is made.In approving variances,the planning commission,may,at its option,require special conditions to ensure development in accordance with objectives,standards and requirements of this chapter. (c)Building line van'ances.In those instances where a recorded subdivision plat has established building setback lines in accordance with this chapter variances of those lines shall only be granted by the board of adjustment.That body shall review each building line variance request for hardship circumstances as required by chapter 36,article II,division 2.Those variances approved by the board of adjustment shall be reflected upon a replat of the subject lots which shall be recorded in the office of the circuit clerk of the county.A bill of assurance amendment shall not be required by the review process nor shall the administrator sign a bill of assurance.The owner or applicant shall be instructed to review the filing procedure with the circuit clerk should a revised bill of assurance be required by that office. Platting costs shall be born by the applicant or owner. (d)Appeais.Appeals from a decision of the board of directors regarding a variance request maybepresentedtothePulaskiCountyChanceryCourtwithinthirty(30)days from the date the decision is filed in the city clerk's office. Page "l3 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DMFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 STAFF REPORT:( Current Subdivision Ordinance language requires variance requests to be heard by the Board ofDirectorswithrecommendationscomingfromthePlanningCommission.The proposed amendment willallowtheCommissiontoapprovethevarianceswithappealsonlyhavingtobeheardbytheBoardofDirectors. SUGGESTED TEXT:() Section 31-'1 2.Val lances (a)Genera/Iy The rules and regulations set forth in this chapter are the standard requirements oftheCity.Where the planning commission finds,however,that extraordinary hardships or practical difficulties may result from strict compliance with these regulations,or the purpose oftheseregulationsmaybeservedtoagreaterextentbyanalternativeproposal,it may approvevariancesfromthesubdivisionregulationssothatsubstantialjusticemaybedoneandthepublicinterestsecured.The planning commission shall be empowered to grant variances with requesttotheimprovementsandthedesignstandardrelativetolotdimensionsandarrangements,streetlocation,alignment,the location and alignment of easements,building lines and similar standards.Such variances,however,shall not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purposeoftheseregulations.The following criteria shall be used to determine whether a variance shallbegranted: (1)The conditions upon which the request for variance is based are unique to the propertyanditisdeterminedbecauseoftheparticularphysicalsurrounding,shape or topographic conditions of the property Involved,strict application of these regulations would deprivetheownerofreasonableuseoftheproperty. (2)The granting of a variance will not be detrimental to the public safety,health or welfare,or injurious to other property. (3)The variance will not in any manner vary the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance,the Master Street Plan or the Municipal Plan. (4)The variance is not based solely on pecuniary difficulties,but has other overriding hardships. Page 'l4 2006 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2GG6 SUGGESTED TEXT:() (b)/3ui/ding /ine variances.In those instances where a recorded subdivision plat has established building setback lines in accordance with this chapter variances of those lines shall only be granted by the board of adjustment.That body shall review each building line variance requestforhardshipcircumstancesasrequiredbychapter36,article II,division 2.Those variances approved by the board of adjustment shall be reflected upon a replat of the subject lots which shall be recorded in the office of the circuit clerk of the county.A bill of assurance amendment shall not be required by the review process nor shall the administrator sign a bill of assurance. The owner or applicant shall be instructed to review the filing procedure with the circuit clerk should a revised bill of assurance be required by that office.Platting costs shall be born by the applicant or owner. (c)Appea/s,Appeals from the decision of the Planning Commission regarding a variance request may be presented to the Board of Directors within thirty (30)days of the Commission's action. The content of the appeal filing shall consist of: (1)A cover letter addressed to the mayor and the board of directors setting forth the request;(2)a copy of the planning commission application indicating the action and property executed by the staff.Notification for the board of directors'earing shall be as required for the planning commission.Appeals from a decision of the board of directors regarding a variance request maybepresentedtothePulaskiCountyChanceryCourtwithinthirty(30)days from the date theboard's decision is filed in the City Clerk's office. Page 15 2006 PRGPGSED QRDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 1 2006 PROBLEM:Pro osal to amend the definition SOURCE:Staff of buildin hei ht. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: Sectaon 36-2 Building height means the vertical distance as measured through the central axis of the building from the elevation of the lowest finished floor level to the highest point of ceiling of the top story in thecaseofaflatroof;to the deck line of a mansard roof;and to the mean height level between the eaves and ridge of a gable,hip or a gambrel roof.This definition shall not be deemed to include church steeples,bell towers,antennas,chimneys,or other similar structural embellishments. STAFF REPORT:( In response to citizen concerns about the height of new residential construction on sloped lots,staff proposes to adopt a new definition of building height.The proposed new definition is based on the building height definition in the International Building Code. SUGGESTED TEXT: Amend Section 36-1 to add new definitions Building height means the vertical distance as measured through the central axis of the building from the grade plan to the highest point of ceiling of the top story in the case of a flat roof;to the deck line of a mansard roof;and to the mean height level between the eaves and ridge of a gable,hip or gambrel roof. This definition shall not be deemed to include church steeples,bell towers,antennas,chimneys or other similar structural embellishments. Grade plane means a reference plane representing the average of finished ground level adjoining the building at exterior walls.N/here the finished ground level slopes away from the exterior walls,the reference plane shall be established by the lowest points within the area between the building and the lot line or,where the lot line is more than six (6)from the building,between the building and a point six (6)feet from the building. Page 16 PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE RECORD DATE +0~$4~& MEMBER F ADCQCK,PAM ALLEN,FRED,JR. HARGRAVES,LUCAS LAHA,TRQY LANGLAIS,GARY MEYER,JERRY RAHMAN,MIZAN STEBBINS,RGBERT TAYLGR,CHAUNCEY IIILLIAMS,DARRIN YATES,JEFF MEMBER ADCQCK,PAM ALLEN,FRED,JR. HARGRAVES,LUCAS LAHA,TROY LANGLAIS,GARY MEYER,JERRY e RAHMAN,MIZAN STEBBINS,RGBERT TAYLGR,CHAUNCEY WILLIAMS,DARRIN YATES,JEFF Meeting Adjourned 0-~P.M. itYs ~Navs 6 AsszNT ~p,ssTwN ~Ftvcuss November 9,2006 There being no further business before the Commission,the meeting was acl]oulnecl at 5:42 p.IVI. 4 e retarY Chairman