pc_06 09 2005
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
JUNE 9, 2005
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being ten (10) in number.
II. Members Present: Pam Adcock
Gary Langlais
Mizan Rahman
Bill Rector
Robert Stebbins
Jerry Meyer
Norm Floyd
Fred Allen, Jr.
Jeff Yates
Darrin Williams
Members Absent: Chauncey Taylor
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the April 28, 2005 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
JUNE 9, 2005
4:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Z-1662-C Donnie’s Foreign Car Service – Revised Conditional Use Permit
104 Markham Park Drive
B. Z-7725 Black Community Developers Transitional Housing –
Conditional Use Permit
4017 West 12th Street
C. Z-7726 Victory Outreach Church Transitional Housing –
Conditional Use Permit
3401 West 12th Street
D. S-1229-B Sage Meadows Apartments Site Plan Review
South of Tanya Drive, west of John Barrow Road
II. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Z-7563-B Rezoning from R-5 to O-3
NE corner of University Avenue and “F” Street
1.1. G-23-344 Grant Street, “G” Street and Alley Right-of-Way Abandonments
Lincoln Park Addition
2. Z-7849 Rezoning from R-2 to AF
11227 Dewitt Lane
3. Z-7850 Rezoning from R-3 to C-3
NW corner of Asher Avenue and Allis Street
4. Z-7852 Rezoning from O-3 to O-2
Lot 7, Baptist Medical Center
5. Z-7854 Rezoning from R-2 to I-2
West side of S. Shackleford Road, South of Colonel Glenn Road
6. G-23-343 Alley Right-of-Way Abandonment
Block 4, Weldon E. Wright’s Addition
Agenda, Page Two
II. NEW BUSINESS: (Cont.)
7. Z-7573-A Hicks Beauty Products and Salon – Conditional Use Permit
6805 West 12th Street, Suite H
8. Z-7851 Chenal Elementary School – Conditional Use Permit
Denny Road, west of the Wildwood Center
9. Z-7853 Briscoe Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
3701 Potter Street
10. Z-7855 Young’s Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit
3501 West 13th Street
11. Z-7836 Ransom Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
1623 N. University Avenue
12. Review of Proposed Amendments to the Land Alteration Regulations
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-1662-C
NAME: Donnie’s Foreign Car Service –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 104 Markham Park Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT: Donnie Van Patter
PROPOSAL: A revision to a previously approved conditional use
permit is requested to allow an auto repair garage in
the existing building on this C-3 zoned property.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of Markham Park Drive;
between West Markham Street and North Bowman Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within the intensely developed Markham/Bowman
Commercial Neighborhood. All surrounding properties are zoned
commercial and contain a wide variety of commercial uses. As long as
there is no outside storage of auto parts or storage of inoperable vehicles
on this site, the proposed use should be compatible with uses and zoning
in the area.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Birchwood and Woodland
Hills/Aspen Highland Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site is accessed by one driveway off of Markham Park Drive. There
are 26 parking spaces, plus the spaces in the service bays. This 9,000
square foot auto service center is required to have 40 parking spaces; 5
spaces plus 1 space per 250 square feet. The original C.U.P. was
approved with the current parking numbers. No expansion of the facility is
proposed.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments on use change for existing building.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1662-C
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. No comments on proposed change of use for existing building.
2. This land is located in the floodplain. A special Grading Permit for
Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to any
future construction or improvements.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Service line improvements may be required for auto repair
business at this location. Contact LRWU for details prior to starting
operations.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
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: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 17, 2005)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding signage, days and hours of operation and the
number of employees. The applicant was asked to indicate on the site plan
where vehicles awaiting service were to be stored.
Public Works, Utility and Landscape Comments were noted.
The applicant was instructed to respond to staff issues by April 13, 2005. The
Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1662-C
3
STAFF ANALYSIS:
In April 1987, a conditional use permit was approved for this C-3 zoned site to
allow an automobile service business that specialized in “tire sales and minor
repair, excluding body work.” The building is now occupied by Donnie’s Foreign
Car Service, Best Tire and Reliable Transmission. Donnie’s does mostly service
work; including tune-ups, oil changes, timing belts, brakes, water pumps, belts,
tires, engine performance computer upgrades, air intakes, repair of oil leaks,
struts and shocks. The business does not do engine overhauls, engine
rebuilding, paint or body work, machine work or car restoration. The
transmission shop rents one bay in the building. Staff determined the activity in
the building now exceeded that which was allowed under the approved C.U.P.
The applicant subsequently applied for this revision.
No changes are proposed to the site. There may be a change of text on the
existing signs to accommodate the users. Hours of operation are 7:30 a.m. to
5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Donnie’s has 7 employees and Reliable
Transmission has one employee. There is no storage of parts, equipment or
materials outside of the building. Four (4) parking spaces are indicated on the
site plan for parking of inoperable vehicles awaiting service. The use is not in
violation of the 1986 Bill of Assurance for Markham Commercial Subdivision.
With appropriate conditions attached to the use, staff believes it is compatible
with uses and zoning in the area. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding
issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the following conditions:
1. Compliance with all comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the Staff Report.
2. There is to be no outside storage of parts, equipment or materials.
3. All work must take place within the enclosed building.
4. No inoperable vehicles are to remain on the site for longer than thirty (30)
days.
5. All dumpsters and trash collection areas are to be screened as required by
the Code.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1662-C
4
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 28, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the item needed to be deferred since the applicant had sent
the required notices only 7 days prior to the meeting, not 15 days as required.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the June 9, 2005
meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-7725
NAME: Black Community Developers Transitional Housing –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 4017 West 12th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Black Community Developers, Inc.
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow use of
the existing duplex on this R-4 zoned lot as
transitional housing for up to 12 women; 6 per unit.
STAFF REPORT:
The task force which is studying the issue of Transitional Housing has not yet
completed its work. It is believed that a report will be coming from that group
soon; including proposed ordinance changes. Staff believes this item needs to
be deferred to the December 16, 2004 Agenda to allow that process to continue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that this item be deferred to the December 16, 2004 Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 21, 2004)
Staff recommended to the Commission that the application be deferred to the
December 16, 2004 Agenda, in order for the Transitional Housing Task Force to
complete its work.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 16, 2004 Agenda. A motion to
that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and
2 absent. The application was deferred.
STAFF REPORT:
The work of the Transitional Housing Task Force, including proposing Ordinance
changes, is not complete. This item needs to be deferred to the February 3,
2005 agenda to allow that process to continue.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7725
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present.
Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the February 3, 2005 Agenda.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the February 3,
2005 meeting by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Task Force has completed its work and proposed ordinance changes have
been forwarded to the Planning Commission. This application will be amended
to a Special Use Permit to comply with the ordinance changes. Staff
recommends that the item be deferred to the March 17, 2005 Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 3, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present.
Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the March 17, 2005 Agenda.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the March 17,
2005 meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Task Force which had been studying the issue of transitional housing
facilities in the City of Little Rock forwarded its recommendations in the form of
suggested Ordinance amendments to the Planning Commission. The
Commission reviewed the issue at its February 3, 2005 meeting. The
Commission was divided in its opinion of the proposed amendments. The Board
of Directors has not yet reviewed or acted on the suggested changes.
It is the opinion of Staff and the City Attorney’s office that the application should
be deferred again. Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the next
regularly scheduled Commission hearing, which is on April 28, 2005.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7725
3
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 17, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
recommended that the item be deferred to the April 28, 2005 Agenda. There
was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 28, 2005
meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the June 9, 2005 agenda to allow
further review of the issue of Transitional Housing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 28, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
recommended that the item be deferred to the June 9, 2005 Agenda. There was
no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the June 9, 2005
meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Planning Commission has continued to study the issue of Transitional
Housing and related issue. The matter was most recently discussed at the
Commission’s May 19, 2005 informal meeting. Unresolved issues remain. Staff
believes it is appropriate to defer this application to the July 21 Commission
meeting as the ordinance review process continues.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
recommended that the item be deferred to the July 21, 2005 Agenda. There was
no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 21, 2005
meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-7726
NAME: Victory Outreach Church Transitional Housing –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 3401 West 12th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Victory Outreach Church/Deverick Green
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow use of
the existing duplex on this R-4 zoned lot as a
transitional housing facility for up to 11 men and an
on-site manager.
STAFF REPORT:
The task force which is studying the issue of Transitional Housing has not yet
completed its work. It is believed that a report will be coming from that group
soon; including proposed ordinance changes. Staff believes this item needs to
be deferred to the December 16, 2004 agenda to allow that process to continue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that this item be deferred to the December 16, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 21, 2004)
Staff recommended to the Commission that the application be deferred to the
December 16, 2004 Agenda, in order for the Transitional Housing Task Force to
complete its work.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 16, 2004 Agenda. A motion to
that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and
2 absent. The application was deferred.
STAFF REPORT:
The work of the Transitional Housing Task Force, including proposed ordinance
changes, is not complete. This item needs to be deferral to the February 3, 2005
Agenda to allow that process to continue.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7726
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present.
Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the February 3, 2005 Agenda.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the February 3,
2005 meeting by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Task Force has completed its work and proposed ordinance changes have
been forwarded to the Planning Commission. This application will be amended
to a Special Use Permit to comply with the ordinance changes. Staff
recommends that the item be deferred to the March 17, 2005 Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 3, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present.
Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the March 17, 2005 Agenda.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the March 17,
2005 meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Task Force which had been studying the issue of transitional housing
facilities in the City of Little Rock forwarded its recommendations in the form of
suggested Ordinance amendments to the Planning Commission. The
Commission reviewed the issue at is February 3, 2005 meeting. The
Commission was divided in its opinion of the proposed amendments. The Board
of Directors has not yet reviewed or acted on the suggested changes.
It is the opinion of Staff and the City Attorney’s office that the application should
be deferred again. Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the next
regularly scheduled Commission hearing, which is on April 28, 2005.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7726
3
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 17, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
recommended that the item be deferred to the April 28, 2005 Agenda. There
was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 28, 2005
meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the June 9, 2005 Agenda to allow
further review of the issue of transitional housing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 28, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
recommended that the item be deferred to the June 9, 2005 Agenda. There was
no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the June 9, 2005
meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The Planning Commission has continued to study the issue of Transitional
Housing and related issues. The matter was most recently discussed at the
Commission’s May 19, 2005 informal meeting. Unresolved issues remain. Staff
believes it is appropriate to defer this application to the July 21, 2005
Commission meeting as the ordinance review process continues.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
recommended that the item be deferred to the July 21, 2005 Agenda. There was
no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 21, 2005
meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: S-1229-B
NAME: Barrow Road Apartments Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: On the West side of John Barrow Road, South of Tanya Drive
DEVELOPER:
WTH Development
8503 Asher Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72204
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 33.80 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F.
CURRENT ZONING: MF-12
PLANNING DISTRICT: 11
CENSUS TRACT: 24.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The site was zoned MF-12 (Multi-family Residential – 12 units per gross acre) on
January 3, 1978, with Ordinance No. 13,393 adopted by the Little Rock Board of
Directors. The west 110 feet of the property ownership was left as R-2 zoning, when
the remainder of the property was zoned, to serve as a buffer between this site and the
single-family property to the west.
In 1999, a proposal was submitted to develop multi-family residences on the site. The
density proposed was under the twelve units per gross acre as allowed by the City’s
Zoning Ordinance. The request was to be heard by the Planning Commission at their
January 21, 1999, Public Hearing but was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the Public
Hearing.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
2
The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request for a Subdivision Site Plan
Review at their March 11, 2004, Public Hearing. The applicant proposed to develop the
34-acre site with a two-part development plan. The applicant indicated a desire to
develop 20.64 acres as a Planned Residential Development as a separate item on the
agenda (Z-3173-C through a Planned Residential Development) and the remaining
13.16 acres as a multiple building multi-family residential development. The applicant
indicated the development of the multi-family portion of the site with 126 units or at a
density of 9.6 units per acre.
The proposed site plan included signage for both the single-family subdivision and the
multi-family development. The signage was to be located near the drive into the multi-
family development and at the entrance to the single-family subdivision.
The proposed site plan included a clubhouse, two lakes and two play ground
recreational spaces. The development also contained a series of pedestrian trails
connecting the multi-family and the single-family development. The clubhouse and pool
would be developed as a part of a property owners association through the Planned
Residential Development, allowing both the single-family homes and the multi-family
residents access to the facilities.
The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted an ordinance on May 17, 2005, revoking the
PD-R zoning for 20.64 acres of the site; restoring the MF-12 zoning to the entirety of
this 33.80 acre site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing a site plan review for the Phase I portion of this
proposed multi-family development. The applicant has indicated when
development plans for Phases II and III are finalized, site plans will be submitted
for approval. The Phase I portion of the development includes the development
of 128 apartment units along with a clubhouse and pool facility. The site plan
includes the placement of 13 apartment buildings with a maximum building
height of 35-feet and one building for the clubhouse. The applicant has
indicated 262 parking spaces on the site plan, resulting in a parking ratio of 2.04
spaces per unit. The applicant has indicated a total building footprint area of
98,000 square feet. Ten of the buildings are proposed as split-level; three
stories tall on one side and two stories tall on the opposite site. The remaining
buildings are proposed as two story buildings.
The applicant has indicated the minimum building setback along the southern
property line as 153-feet and 156-feet along the western property line. There is
a 125-foot undisturbed buffer along the western property line. The applicant has
indicated 10 acres of the site will remain undistributed. The site plan includes
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
3
the placement of two lakes. One of the proposed lakes will contain 0.32 acres
and the second proposed lake will contain 1.43 acres. The applicant has
indicated fishing piers will be added to the large lake. The site plan also includes
the placement of a playground area near the clubhouse pool area. A second
playground area has been added near the northern boundary of the Phase I
portion of the development.
One sign is proposed as a part of the development. The applicant has indicated
the proposed sign will be consistent with signage allowed in multi-family zones.
The applicant is also proposing the development as a gated community. The
applicant has indicated the gates are not a part of the immediate plans but is
requesting the option of adding gates in the future.
The proposed site plan includes dedication of right-of-way along John Barrow
Road per the Master Street Plan requirement.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant and tree covered, sloping from the north and south to the
center of the site. There is a nursing home located at the northeast corner of the
site. Park View High School is located to the northeast of the site and single-
family homes are located to the southeast. To the south of the site is an area
zoned MF-24 with a welding shop and a separate building containing a
contractor’s office. Single-family homes are located along West 29th Street to
the south of the site. To the west of the site are also single-family homes in the
Twin Lakes/Campus Place Neighborhood.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls in opposition of the
proposed use from area residents. All residents who could be identified located
within 300-feet of the site, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association, the
Campus Place Property Owners Association, the Twin Lakes “B” Property
Owners Association, Twin Lakes B Special Improvement District and all owners
of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. The proposed street from John Barrow going west to the last apartment
entrance should be designed as a 36 foot collector street. The remainder
can be 31 foot as shown on the plan.
2. Provide curve data for the collector street. The standard radius for a normal
crown is 275 feet with a 100-foot tangent between reverse curves.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
4
3. The residential street curve radius at the northwest corner of the development
does not meet the standard 150-foot radius.
4. 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.
5. Show the location and preliminary sizing for all storm drains. Easements
must be provided for all storm drains. Assuming the 0.48-acre lake will serve
as detention for the residential subdivision, easements are likewise required
for that drainage.
6. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required
by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at
(501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light
requirements.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Private sewer main crossing property. Must be relocated and
dedicated to Little Rock Wastewater Utility as a public sewer main with
easements. Capacity Contribution Analysis required, contact Little Rock
Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Easements are required to serve the proposed development.
Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional information.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. The facilities on-site in the
area of the apartments will be private. When meters are planned off private
lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material
and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an
engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. A water main
extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. This
development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional
information.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
5
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffer and landscaping appear to meet with the
landscape and buffer requirements.
Screening is required along the southern perimeter of the site adjacent to the
residentially zoned properties. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wall, or
wooden fence with its face side directed outward, or dense evergreen plantings,
is required.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, 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 tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape
Ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6)
inch caliper or larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 10, 2005)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed request indicating the proposed site plan could not
move forward until the issue of revocation was resolved. Staff stated there were
additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the
applicant indicate on the proposed site plan locations of playground areas. Staff
also questioned if amenities such as fishing piers would be added to the lake
areas.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated proposed gates should
be located to allow sufficient turn-around. Staff also stated the roadway should
be designed as a 36-foot drive near John Barrow Road.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated areas set aside for buffers
and landscaping appeared to meet with the landscape and buffer requirements.
Staff noted screening would be required along the perimeters adjacent to
residentially zoned property.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
6
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies, indicating the applicant should contact them individually for further
clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the February 10, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The Little
Rock Board of Directors adopted an ordinance on May 17, 2005, revoking the
previous PD-R zoning of a portion of this site restoring the entirety of the site to
MF-12 with a 110-foot R-2 zoned strip along the western perimeter. The
applicant has indicated the proposed gates with sufficient turn-around to allow an
escape should a visitor not be able to access the site. The applicant has also
indicated the roadway as a 36-foot drive near the intersection with John Barrow,
per staff’s request. The applicant has also indicated two playground areas and
fishing piers for the proposed lakes. Landscaping comments have been
addressed. The applicant has indicated screening will be placed along the
southern and western perimeters of the site to comply with the buffer and
landscape ordinance requirements.
The proposed site plan complies with all requirements for the Subdivision
Ordinance for a Multiple Building Site Plan Review. The applicant has indicated
building setbacks, building heights, density, signage and parking in compliance
with the ordinance requirements.
The applicant has indicated a minimum building setback of 153-feet. The
ordinance typically requires a minimum building setback of 25-feet. The
applicant has a maximum building height of 35-feet, consistent with building
heights allowed in the MF-12 zoning district. The applicant has indicated a
proposed density of 3.79 units per acre, well below the allowable 12 units per
acre. This takes into account the remainder of the MF-12 zoned 33.8 acres
which is shown for future development. The site plan includes the placement of
262 parking spaces. The minimum parking required for 128 apartment units
would be 192 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated signage will comply
with signage allowed in multi-family zones or a maximum of twenty-four square
feet of sign area for a ground-mounted sign.
Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. To staff’s knowledge there are no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The indicated site
plan appears to fully comply with minimum ordinance requirements for a multiple
building site plan review per the Subdivision Ordinance.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
7
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated the
proposed site plan appeared to meet all the minimum requirements for a subdivision
site plan review with regard to landscaping, setbacks and buffers. Staff noted there
were a few technical issues, which would be resolved between the applicant and staff at
the time of building permit. Staff stated the main issue was related to the proposed
driveway location and width.
Ms. Betty Snyder addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request.
She stated she was representing the John Barrow Neighborhood Association and
wanted to go on the public record in opposition to additional apartment units in the John
Barrow Neighborhood. She stated the association did not feel the proposed
development was a “fit” with the neighborhood. She stated the neighborhood did not
support the tax credit application approved by the Mayor and Board of Directors at their
previous meeting for the proposed development. She questioned if the ADFA funds
were not available would the development be constructed.
Ms. Snyder stated if the development was going to be a part of the neighborhood then
the John Barrow Neighborhood Association was requesting the developer provide the
association with an office within the development. She stated the association wanted to
keep a handle on the proposed development and additionally the association was
looking for a place to store files.
Ms. Snyder stated John Barrow Road was currently congested and questioned if a
traffic light was proposed as a part of the development. She stated with the addition of
100 plus units and the completion of the three phases proposed within the development
this would generate a great deal of traffic. She stated it was difficult to exit onto John
Barrow Road currently and with the additional units the residents would not be able to
exit the development safely.
The Commission questioned if a traffic signal was warranted. Staff stated it was not
warranted at this time.
The developer stated the ADFA funding that had been applied for typically had
available funds. He stated an office use for the association was something the owners
would be willing to entertain as an allowable activity. He stated the association would
be welcome to hold their monthly meetings on the site at the clubhouse facility.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: . D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1229-B
8
There was a general discussion concerning the approval being sought and the
Commission’s role. Staff stated the Commission’s charge was to review the site plan to
ensure compliance with the minimum ordinance standards.
A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
1 no and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: Z-7563-B
Owner: J. C.Halsell
Applicant: Brian Tinnel,
McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Location: Northeast corner of University Avenue
and “F” Street
Area: Approximately 1.65 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-5 to O-3
Purpose: Medical Clinic
Existing Use: Two (2) Single Family Residential Structures
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Office and Commercial uses; zoned O-3 and PCD
South – Office and Clinic uses (across “F” Street); zoned O-3,
PCD and R-5
East – Single Family Residences; zoned R-3
West – Single Family Residences and Catholic High School
property; zoned R-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. For this zoning action, a 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is
required at the intersection of “F” Street and University Avenue.
2. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
Sec. 8-283 prior to construction. The previous, unauthorized fill in the
floodway must be removed back to the mapped floodway line. The
survey, as provided, does not appear to accurately depict the existing
floodway line, but rather the toe of the existing slope.
3. 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.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563-B
2
4. With site development, provide design of streets conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to these
streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on CATA Bus Route #21 (University Avenue Route).
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Hillcrest and Evergreen
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a
rezoning from R-5 (Urban Residence District) to O-3 (General Office
District) for development of an office building. The request does not
require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Bicycle Plan:
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate
vicinity of the development.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
University Avenue is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street
Plan with special design standards south of the site between Lee and
Markham Streets, which indicate a 100-foot right-of-way. Adjacent to the
site University Avenue has a median separating northbound and
southbound traffic. Southbound University Avenue traffic will not access
this site directly, nor will traffic be able to leave this site in the southbound
University Avenue direction unless a median cut is approved. A median
cut could harm traffic flow on University Avenue. The primary function of
a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits
should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on
University Avenue since it is a Principal Arterial. Additional improvements
and right-of-way may be required for acceleration and deceleration lanes
since this section of University Avenue has a significant hill.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563-B
3
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHOBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest
Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal lists one
objective related to this application. The objective is to recreate a
neighborhood that is a pleasant place to work and live, and to preserve
the net number of residential units by not demolishing them or converting
them to other uses. This application will result in the demolition of two
single-family homes and the new office space provided could be a place
of employment for area residences.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
J. C. Halsell, owner of the 1.65 Acre property at the northeast corner of
University Avenue and “F” Street, is requesting to rezone the property
from “R-5” Urban Residence District to “O-3” General Office District. The
rezoning is proposed in order to develop a new medical clinic. Proposed
right-of-way abandonment for abutting portions of Grant Street and “G”
Street associated with this property is a separate item on the agenda
(Item 1.1).
There are two (2) single-family residential structures within the west
portion of the property, along University Avenue. The east portion of the
property is undeveloped. There is a paved access drive within the Grant
Street right-of-way, which has served as access to the property.
The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. There are office,
commercial and residential uses to the north along University Avenue and
“H” Street. Office/clinic uses are located to the south along University
Avenue. Single-family residences are located to the east and southeast.
Single-family residences and the Catholic High School campus are
located across University Avenue to the west and southwest.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as office. The
requested zoning change to O-3 does not require a change to the Land
Use Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested O-3 zoning. Staff feels the requested
rezoning is appropriate. The rezoning to O-3 and development of the site
as a medical clinic will continue the pattern of clinical uses along the east
side of University Avenue, north of “C” Street. Staff believes the
requested O-3 zoning will have no adverse impact on the general area.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7563-B
4
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested O-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional
comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 recusal (Yates).
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1.1 FILE NO.: G-23-344
Name: Grant Street and “G” Street – Right-of-Way
Abandonments – Lincoln Park Addition
Location: Near the northeast corner of University
Avenue and “F” Street
Owner/Applicant: J. C. Halsell/Brian Tinnel, McClelland
Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Request: To abandon the one (1) block portion of the
46-foot wide Grant Street right-of-way north of
“F” Street, and the one (1) block portion of the
25-foot wide “G” Street right-of-way east of
University Avenue.
Purpose: To be incorporated into adjacent property for
future development.
STAFF REVIEW:
A. Public Need for this Right-of-Way
As noted in paragraph G. of this report, all of the public utility companies
consent to the right-of-way abandonments. Several of the utilities request
that all of the areas of abandonment be retained as utility easements.
The Public Works comment is as follows:
1. No objection to the closure of the rights-of-way for public access.
However, Coleman Creek, an existing major drainage way is located in
a portion of “G” Street east of Block 10. Drainage and floodway
easements must be retained in this area.
B. Master Street Plan
The Master Street Plan would classify Grant Street and “G” Street as local
roads. Abandonment of these rights-of-way will not adversely affect the
Master Street Plan, as they are not classified as collector streets or
higher.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-344
2
C. Characteristics of Right-of-Way Terrain
The Grant Street right-of-way currently contains a narrow paved drive,
which has been used to access two (2) single-family residences. The “G”
Street right-of-way is currently undeveloped.
D. Development Potential
Once abandoned, the areas of abandonment will be incorporated into
adjacent property for future development.
E. Neighborhood and Land Use Effect
There are two (2) single-family residential structures along the west side
of the Grant Street right-of-way and a small office use along its east side
(fronting on “F” Street). Undeveloped property is located along the south
side of the “G” Street right-of-way, with office zoned property along the
north side. Abandoning these rights-of-way will have no adverse impact
on the general area.
F. Neighborhood Position
The Hillcrest and Evergreen Neighborhood Associations were notified of
the abandonment requests. As of this writing, staff knows of no objectors
to the proposed abandonments. One (1) property owner along the east
side of the Grant Street right-of-way (O-3 zoned property) has not signed
the petition to abandon, but will be notified of the public hearing.
G. Effect on Public Services or Utilities
• Central Arkansas Water – Central Arkansas Water has no existing or
proposed facilities within these rights-of-way. No objection to right-of-
way abandonments.
• L.R. Wastewater Utility – No objection to abandonment, but entire
right-of-way must be retained as easement.
• Entergy – Retain all areas of rights-of-way as utility easements.
• CenterPoint Energy (Arkla) – No Comments received.
• Southwestern Bell – No Comments received.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-344
3
H. Reversionary Rights
All reversionary rights will extend to the adjacent property owners.
I. Public Welfare and Safety Issues
Abandoning these street rights-of-way will have no adverse effect on the
public welfare and safety. The Little Rock Fire Department has submitted
no negative comments to the proposed abandonment.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 19, 2005)
Brian Tinnel was present, representing the application. Staff presented the
abandonment request. Staff noted that some additional documentation was
needed to complete the application.
The proposed abandonments were briefly discussed. After the discussion, the
Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Grant Street and “G” Street right-of-
way abandonments, subject to the entire areas of abandonment being retained
as utility and drainage/floodway easements.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional
comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 recusal (Yates).
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-7849
Owner: Joe P. DeWitt
Applicant: James D. Rankin, III
Location: 11227 Dewitt Lane
Area: 29.66 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to AF
Purpose: Forestry
Existing Use: Vacant single family residence and
undeveloped property
STAFF NOTE:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on May 19, 2005 requesting the
application be withdrawn. Staff supports the withdrawal request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
Staff noted that the applicant requested the application be withdrawn. Staff
supported the withdrawal request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for withdrawal. A motion to that effect was made. The motion
passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The application was
withdrawn.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-7850
Owner: Leonard Hall
Applicant: Leonard Hall
Location: Northwest corner of Asher Avenue
and Allis Street
Area: 0.32 Acre
Request: Rezone from R-3 to C-3
Purpose: Barber Shop
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Single family residences, duplexes and a church; zoned R-3
and R-4
South – Single family residences, grocery store and undeveloped lots
(Across Asher Avenue); zoned R-3
East – Cemetery (Across Allis Street); zoned R-3
West – Commercial buildings and duplexes; zoned C-3
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Asher Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 35 feet from centerline will be
required (reduced standard right-of-way).
2. The proposed land use would classify Allis Street on the Master Street
Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline.
3. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection
of the streets.
4. Furnish signed and notarized dedications with final Board approval of
the rezoning request.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7850
2
5. With site development, provide design of streets conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to these
streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on CATA Bus Route. Route #16 (UALR Route)
runs to the north along West 20th Street and to the east along Asher
Avenue/Wright Avenue.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the LOVE and Goodwill
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a
rezoning from R-3 (Single Family Residence District) to C-3 (General
Commercial District) for construction of a barber shop. The request does
not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Bicycle Plan:
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate
vicinity of the development.
Master Street Plan:
Asher Avenue is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan
with special design guidelines indicating a right-of-way of 70 feet with a
four lane section (five at major intersections). The primary function of a
Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Access from Asher
Avenue should be limited since it is a Principal Arterial. Additional
development along Asher Avenue could result in an area traffic increase.
Allis 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. Asher Avenue and Allis Street may require dedication of right-
of-way and may require street improvements.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7850
3
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Stephens
Neighborhood Action Plan. The Economic Development goal listed one
objective relevant to this case. The objective indicates a desire to locate
new business in the Stephens Neighborhood area. This application would
result in a new area business. The Neighborhood Revitalization goal
indicates a need for the replacement of sidewalks. In the event of
approval the sidewalks should be repaired/replaced in order to help
achieve this goal.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Leonard Hall, owner of the 0.32 Acre property at the northwest corner of
Asher Avenue and Allis Street, is requesting to rezone the property from
“R-3” Single Family District to “C-3” General Commercial District. The
property consists of two (2) platted lots. The rezoning is proposed in
order to develop a new commercial building for a barber shop.
The property is currently undeveloped and grass covered. There is a
partially paved alley along the north property line.
The general area contains a mixture of zoning and uses. Single family
residences, duplexes and a church are located to the north. Single family
residences, a small grocery store and vacant lots are located across
Asher Avenue to the south. A cemetery is located to the east across Allis
Street, with O-3, C-3 and I-2 zoned property to the southeast. Two (2)
commercial buildings and several duplexes are located to the west.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial.
The requested zoning change to C-3 does not require a change to the
Land Use Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested C-3 zoning. Staff feels the request is
reasonable. The remainder of this one-half block is zoned C-3 and
contains commercial buildings. Staff feels that C-3 zoning for this
property will be consistent with the zoning pattern in this immediate area.
The applicant should be aware that development of this property must
comply with the C-3 development standards as found in Section 36-301 of
the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Staff believes this proposed C-3 rezoning
will have no negative impact on the general area.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7850
4
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional
comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-7852
Owner: Baptist Health
Applicant: Robert Brown;
Development Consultants, Inc.
Location: Northeast corner of Kanis Road
and Emergency Drive
Area: 3.48 Acres
Request: Rezone from O-3 to O-2
Purpose: Hospital Support Facilities
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Hospital parking lot; zoned O-3
South – Apartment complex and single family residences (Across Kanis
Road); zoned R-2 and MF-18
East – Office/Clinic uses; zoned O-3
West – Baptist Medical Center (Across Emergency Drive); zoned O-2
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.
The provided survey does not show current conditions to document
compliance.
2. With site development, provide design of streets conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to these
streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.
Construct right-turn lane on Kanis per MSP standards.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on CATA Bus Route #3 (Baptist Medical Center
Route).
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7852
2
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Twin Lakes “A” and John
Barrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning
from O-3 (General Office District) to O-2 (Office and Institutional District)
to facilitate future hospital expansion. The request does not require a
change to the Land Use Plan.
Bicycle Plan:
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate
vicinity of the development.
Master Street Plan:
Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial and Emergency Drive is shown
as a Collector on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial
is to provide connections to and through an urban area. A Collector
Street’s primary purpose is to link Local Streets to arterials and activity
centers. Entrances and exists to proposed development should be from
the Collector Street (Emergency Drive) to minimize possible traffic
conflicts on the Minor Arterial. Kanis Road and Emergency Drive may
require dedication of right-of-way may require street improvements.
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.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Baptist Health, owner of the 3.48 Acre property at the northeast corner of
Kanis Road and Emergency Drive, is requesting to rezone the property
from “O-3” General Office District to “O-2” Office and Institutional District.
The rezoning is proposed in order to develop hospital support facilities on
the property.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7852
3
The property is currently undeveloped and wooded. The general area
contains a mixture of uses and zoning. Baptist Medical Center is located
across Emergency Drive to the west, with hospital parking to the north.
Single family residences and an apartment complex are located across
Kanis Road to the south. Office and clinic uses are located to the east
along Kanis Road, with commercial uses and zoning further east. Single
family residential property is located to the northeast.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Office. The
requested zoning change to O-2 does not require a change to the Land
Use Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested O-2 zoning. Staff feels that the
request is appropriate. Development of this property as hospital support
facilities is a reasonable use of the property, with existing hospital and
hospital support facilities located to the west and north. Other clinical type
uses exist to the east. Staff believes this proposed O-2 rezoning will have
no negative impact on the general area. The O-2 zoning district is a site
plan review district. Therefore, future development plans for the property
must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested O-2 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional
comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-7854
Owner: DFP Holdings, LLC
Applicant: Joe White, White-Daters and Associates
Location: West side of S. Shackleford Road
Area: 20 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to I-2
Purpose: Future light industrial development
Existing Use: Two (2) Single Family Structures and
Undeveloped Property
STAFF NOTE:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on May 24, 2005 requesting the
application be withdrawn, without prejudice. Staff supports the withdrawal
request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
Staff noted that the applicant requested the application be withdrawn, without
prejudice. Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for withdrawal, without prejudice. A motion to that effect was
made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The
application was withdrawn, without prejudice.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: G-23-343
Name: Alley Right-of-Way Abandonment – Block 4,
Weldon E. Wright’s Addition
Location: Block bounded by Arch, Gaines, West 21st and
West 22nd Streets
Owner/Applicant: Various owners/Stephen R. Giles
Request: To abandon the north/south platted alley right-
of-way within Block 4, Weldon E. Wright’s
Addition.
Purpose: Both ends of the alley right-of-way will be gated
for security and private access to the single
family residences within this block.
STAFF REVIEW:
A. Public Need for this Right-of-Way
As noted in paragraph G. of this report, all of the public utility companies
consent to the right-of-way abandonment. Several of the utilities request
the area of abandonment be retained as a utility easement. The Public
Works Comment is as follows:
1. There are no drainage facilities located in the alley that are maintained
by Public Works. No objection to the abandonment.
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 Right-of-Way Terrain
The alley right-of-way is currently open and partially gravel covered.
D. Development Potential
Once abandoned, both ends of the alley will be gated, with secure,
controlled access to the single family lots within this block.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-343
2
E. Neighborhood and Land Use Effect
There are nine (9) single family residences within this block, which abut
the alley right-of-way. It does not appear that any of the residential
properties along the alley right-of-way use it for vehicular access.
Abandoning this alley right-of-way will have no adverse impact on the
general area.
F. Neighborhood Position
The Downtown and East of Broadway Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the abandonment request. As of this writing, staff knows of no
objectors to the proposed abandonment.
G. Effect on Public Services or Utilities
• Central Arkansas Water – Central Arkansas Water has no existing or
proposed facilities within this right-of-way. No objection to alley
abandonment.
• L.R. Wastewater Utility – No objection to abandonment, but entire
right-of-way must be retained as easement.
• Entergy – Entergy does not object to the closing of the subject alley
contingent on the following:
1. The entire alley length and width be retained as a utility easement
including rights of ingress and egress and right to keep the
easement clear of structures and trees.
2. If the alley is enclosed with a gate at each end, provisions will be
made to allow utility access to the easement. Entergy prefers a
set-up that will allow ganged locks so we can use our standard lock
instead of a shared lock/key/combination.
3. The alley length between the gates mentioned in item 2 above not
be blocked off or sectioned off by cross fences.
• CenterPoint Energy (Arkla) – No objection to abandonment. Retain
right-of-way as utility easement.
• Southwestern Bell – No objection to abandonment.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-343
3
H. Reversionary Rights
All reversionary rights will extend to the adjacent property owners to the
east and west.
I. Public Welfare and Safety Issues
Abandoning this street right-of-way will have no adverse effect on the
public welfare and safety. The Little Rock Fire Department has submitted
no negative comments to the proposed abandonment.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 19, 2005)
Stephen Giles was present, representing the application. Staff presented the
proposed right-of-way abandonment.
There was a brief discussion pertaining to the location of the future gates at the
ends of the alley. Staff noted that the gates needed to be one (1) car length in
from the West 21st and West 22nd Street rights-of-way. In response to a
question from the Committee, Mr. Giles noted that the alley was not used for
garbage pick-up.
After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed alley right-of-way abandonment,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The entire area of abandonment must be retained as a utility and drainage
easement.
2. Compliance with the utility comments as noted in paragraph G. of the staff
report.
3. If gates are placed at the north and south ends of the alley, they must be at
least one (1) car length in from the West 21st and West 22nd Street rights-of-
way. The Public Works Department must approve gate locations.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-343
4
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional
comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-7573-A
NAME: Hicks Beauty Products & Salon –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 6805 W. 12th Street, Suite H
OWNER/APPLICANT: Danny Thomas Properties/Aundria Hicks
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow retail
beauty products and salon business in one bay of this
I-2 zoned development.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of W. 12th Street; ½ block east
of West Park Drive. The suite is located in the second building off of the
street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
All surrounding properties south of 12th Street are zoned I-2 and are
occupied by a variety of warehousing, wholesaling and commercial uses.
A cemetery is located across W. 12th Street, to the north. Allowing this
small business to occupy one bay in this development should be
compatible with uses in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the University Park
Neighborhood Association were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The lease space is 2, 800 square feet in area; requiring between 10-14
parking spaces depending on the amount of area devoted to retail sales
and the area devoted to the salon. Parking spaces are located in front of,
behind and beside each of the buildings on the site. Other than for the
spaces directly adjacent to 12th Street, much of the parking appears
unused. There is sufficient parking on the site to accommodate the use.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments on this use issue.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7573-A
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. No comments on this use issue.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved
reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is
required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be
installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW)
requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the
assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed
by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results
must be sent to CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days of
installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 377-
1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for
this project.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is located on a CATA Bus Route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 19, 2005)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted there were few
outstanding issues. Staff asked the applicant to provide the number of
employees and to describe any proposed signage. Staff also noted Central
Arkansas Water’s comment regarding the need for an RPZA.
There was no further discussion. The applicant was advised to respond to staff
questions by May 25, 2005.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7573-A
3
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A conditional use permit is requested to allow use of one bay in the multiple
building development at 6805 W. 12th Street for the retail sales of beauty
products and a beauty salon. The property is zoned I-2. The site is occupied by
three large buildings with a total of 66,700 square feet. The applicant proposes
to occupy one, 2,800 square foot space. Other uses in the complex include
warehousing/wholesaling, office warehouse, retail and a restaurant. Large areas
of paved parking are located adjacent to each building.
The proposed business is to operate Monday – Saturday, 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m.
The number of employees will range from 5-10; consisting of stylists, sales and
support staff. Signage will consist of a wall sign and space on the center’s
tenant identification ground sign.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The applicant responded
to issues raised at Subdivision Committee. There is no Bill of Assurance issue.
Staff believes allowing this use should have no effect on surrounding properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the comments in Section 6 of the Agenda Staff Report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-7851
NAME: Chenal Elementary School –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: South side of Denny Road, west of Wildwood
OWNER/APPLICANT: Pulaski County Special School District/Crafton, Tull &
Associates
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a new elementary school on this R-2
zoned 14-acre tract.
STAFF REPORT:
On May 26, 2005, the applicant requested deferral of the item to the July 21,
2005 Agenda. The applicant and staff are continuing to study issues related to
street improvements and wastewater treatment. Staff supports the deferral
request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the
Commission of the deferral request. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 21, 2005
Agenda by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-7853
NAME: Briscoe Accessory Dwelling –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 3701 Potter Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: William E. Briscoe, III
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of an accessory dwelling on this R-3
zoned lot.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the southeast corner of W. 37th and Potter
Streets; in the John Barrow neighborhood.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in a predominately single family neighborhood.
Single family homes are located to the north, east and south. A City park
occupies a four-block area to the west. Housing in the immediate area
ranges from distressed to good quality. A large area of undeveloped
property is located one block to the east. The applicant proposes to
replace an existing building with a small, one-bedroom accessory
dwelling. He has committed to a condition that the property owner will
occupy the property. Staff believes the proposed use will be compatible
with the neighborhood.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The principal dwelling and accessory dwelling require one on-site parking
space each. Currently, the site is served by a single-wide, concrete drive
off of W. 37th Street. The applicant has agreed to widen the driveway to
accommodate two vehicles.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7853
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water
meter(s) are required.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: A CATA Bus Route is located just north of this site, at 36th Street.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 19, 2005)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted there were few
outstanding issues. Staff asked the applicant to provide a description of the
building materials. Mr. Briscoe stated the building would be designed to match
the existing, frame residence. In response to a question, Mr. Briscoe stated only
a separate electric meter would be requested; that other utilities would be shared
with the principal dwelling. Mr. Briscoe stated he would widen the driveway to
accommodate two vehicles and would comply with Ordinance standards for
building setbacks.
There were no other comments to discuss. The Committee forwarded the item
to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-3 zoned lot located at 3701 Potter Street is occupied by a one-story,
frame single family residence and a detached, frame garage structure. The
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7853
3
applicant proposes to remove the garage, which is in a state of disrepair, and
build in its place an accessory dwelling. The accessory dwelling is to be the
same size as the existing garage; 24’ by 31’. The accessory dwelling will be
designed to match the architecture of the house. The structure will contain one
bedroom, a bathroom and a combined kitchen-living area. The applicant had
intended to utilize the existing foundation but has found it to be unstable. The
new structure will be moved 1-2 feet away from the north property line to provide
the required 15 foot street side setback. The new structure will be one story in
height. The applicant will widen the existing paved driveway to accommodate
one additional vehicle. The 1907 Bill of Assurance does not address use issues.
The applicant has stated it is his desire to provide a home for his elderly mother.
With her living in the accessory dwelling, the applicant or his son can care for
her. The applicant has proposed the condition that he or his son must live in the
house while his mother lives in the accessory dwelling. He has also proposed
that owners of the property must live on the site in the event the accessory
dwelling is rented after his mother’s death.
Staff believes it is important that the property owner reside on the site, whether
the accessory dwelling is occupied by a family member or rented to another
individual. Occupancy of the site by the property owner provides a greater level
of responsibility and surety that the site will be maintained. With this condition,
staff can support the proposal.
The applicant has requested a separate electric meter for the accessory
dwelling. Other utilities will not be split.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the utility comments in Section 6 of the Agenda Staff
Report.
2. The owner of this property must occupy either the principal dwelling or
accessory dwelling as their principal residence.
Staff recommends approval of separate electric meters.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7853
4
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-7836
NAME: Ransom Accessory Dwelling –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 1623 N. University Avenue
OWNER/APPLICANT: Kenneth Ransom/Mike Ransom
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of an accessory dwelling on this R-2
zoned lot.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the east side of University Avenue; one block
south of Cantrell Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within a small single family residential
neighborhood which is bordered by office and multi-family developments
on the south and the Heights Commercial District on the north. The older
neighborhood, east of University, of which this property is part, is stable
and most all of the homes are well maintained. The somewhat newer
residential neighborhood, across University is stable and well maintained
as well. The applicant’s proposal is to use both the existing residence and
proposed accessory dwelling as rental property. Staff questions
if the proposed use is of benefit to the neighborhood and whether the use
would be compatible with the single family properties.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Hillcrest, Forest Park and
South Normandy Neighborhood Associations were notified.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The principal dwelling and accessory dwelling each require one, on-site
parking space. The applicant proposes to construct a three-vehicle
parking pad at the rear of the site, taking access off of the alley.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7836
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional or larger water
meter(s) are required.
Fire Department: No Comments.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is located on a CATA Bus Route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 19, 2005)
Kenneth Ransom was present representing the application. Staff presented the
item and noted additional information was needed regarding building design,
number of bedrooms and building setbacks. Staff noted a copy of the Bill of
Assurance needed to be provided. Staff asked if separate utilities were
requested.
There were no other comments to discuss.
The applicant was instructed to respond to staff comments by May 25, 2005.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned property located at 1623 North University is occupied by a one
story single family residence. The applicant proposes to construct a two-story
accessory dwelling and three-car parking pad near the rear of the lot. The
accessory dwelling will contain one bedroom. The building will be designed to
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7836
3
compliment the home’s craftsman style; siding, 3 tab shingles, single gable and
exposed rafter tails. Separate water and electric meters are requested. The
structure will not have gas service. The applicant states no Bill of Assurance
was available from the County.
Staff has concerns about the applicant’s proposal. While the concept of having
an accessory dwelling is not viewed as negative by staff, this particular proposal
is to create two rental units on the property. The property owner will not live on
site. Staff believes there is value in having the property owner occupy the site
when an accessory dwelling is involved. There clearly is a greater level of
responsibility and accountability when the property owner is on-site.
The Code typically requires the property owner to live on site and only allows
two-story accessory dwellings when the ground-floor is a garage. The structure
is also proposed to have a side yard setback of 2 feet on the south side; the
Code requires 3 feet.
While the Commission does have authority to vary the standards related to
occupancy, number of floors and setbacks, staff does not believe it would be in
the best interest of this neighborhood to allow the accessory dwelling under
those conditions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
The applicant was not present. There were two objectors present. Staff
informed the Commission that the applicant had failed to send the required
notices.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 21, 2005
Agenda by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 12 LAND ALTERATION REGULATIONS
Name: Proposed Revisions to Land Alteration
Regulations, Sec. 29-166
Location: Little Rock Rev. Code (1988)
Owner/Applicant: City of Little Rock Public Works
Request: Approval of proposed revisions to
the Land Alteration Regulations,
Sec. 29-166
STAFF REVIEW:
1. History and Overview:
The Land Alteration Regulations Sec. 29-166 through Sec. 29-195 (“the
regulations”) were adopted by the City of Little Rock Board of Directors
(“BOD”) on September 26, 2000. The regulations were assembled by a
task force consisting of staff, landscape architects, developers, engineers,
neighborhood association representatives, and concerned citizens who
met for over one (1) year. The final terms of the regulations were
mediated between committee and developer’s representatives.
Representatives from both sides encouraged the BOD to pass the
regulations “as is”. Currently, the regulations have been in place for
approximately 5 years.
2. Overview of Proposed Additions:
During the 5 years the regulations have been administered and enforced,
it has become apparent that some adjustment to the ordinance provisions
are needed to improve the administration of the ordinance. For example,
while the ordinance as now written provides that the Commission is to
decide all appeals, the ordinance lacks any specifics on appeal
procedures, authority and responsibilities of the Planning Commission;
and what occurs after ruling on appeals. This revision adds new
ordinance section to address this issue.
Another revision concerns the handling of requests for variances.
Currently, variances are considered by the Commission as a part of the
site plan review process, but there are no specific provisions for the
handling of variance requests. In speaking with task force members, the
handling of variances was discussed in task force deliberations, but no
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) LAND ALTERATION REGULATIONS
2
specifics were set forth in the final ordinance. As a practical matter, the
Commission needs some authority to formally deal with variance requests
due to specific site conditions.
The third revision concerns corrective action of a land alteration violation
that has occurred without a grading permit. The regulations only state to
restore the land to the maximum extent practicable to its original condition
but includes no further explanation of what that means or how to do it. A
new section was added to address restoration.
Other revisions include the addition of definitions for terms used in the
ordinance and clarifying grading and drainage plan requirements and an
increase in permit fees of 20%.
3. Revisions:
The proposed revisions to the regulations have been drafted by staff and
reviewed by the City Attorney’s office. They have been placed on public
notice and presented to the City Beautiful Commission and Planning
Commission for comment.
The proposed revisions consist of language introduced to improve the
administration and enforcement of the regulations. General
housekeeping and maintenance changes were also introduced. Due to
the nature of the revisions and comments received, staff does not believe
the submittal of the regulations back to the citizen’s task force is
warranted.
The proposed revisions consist of detailed requirements for restoration
work located in Section 29-196; increase in the grading permit fees by
20% located in Section 29-193; and definition of terms located at the
beginning of the regulations. Additions have been made to section 29-
172 to further detail appeals of violations of the regulations. Further
language has also been added to Section 29-187 to institute a variance
process to the regulations.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposed revisions will improve the administration and enforcement of the
regulations. The staff opinion is that no additions have been made to the
regulations or provisions omitted that would significantly change the framework
of the ordinance that the original task force recommended to the Board. Staff
recommends approval of the proposed revisions to the regulations.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) LAND ALTERATION REGULATIONS
3
CITY BEAUTIFUL COMMISSION – March 3, May 5 and 12, 2005
Staff presented the revisions to the CBC and received written comments. The
majority of those comments are incorporated into the final mark-up except for a
request to increase the monetary penalty for violations and including the BOD as
an additional appellate body for Planning Commission decisions.
In the case of penalties, the authority of the municipal court is governed by state
statute. For appeals, staff believes that the intent of the original ordinance was
that all appeals and administrative review authority was intended to rest with the
Commission. Therefore, a provision that all land alteration decisions can be
appealed to the Board was not added to the ordinance. The Commission’s
decision will be final for appeals of enforcement actions, appeal of restoration
requirements, and for a portion of the variance requests.
As a practical matter, the Board or Directors will have oversight authority for
many of the variance requests associated with large site development plans. All
Commission decisions in these cases are advisory since the Board must review
and adopt a change in the zoning ordinance. The Board may consider any
variance requests as a part of the zoning review.
INFORMAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS –
February 17 and May 19, 2005
Staff presented a slide show outline of the recommended revisions at the
Planning Commission Informal Meeting on February 17, 2005. Input from the
Commissioners at this meeting was used to draft the actual revisions. Some
comments received were:
• Provide a method to handle select cutting of timber on R2 zoned property,
• Provide a means to allow advance grading on sites where building
construction is not imminent,
• Procedures for appeals and restoration need to be established, and
• Staff should have the authority to allow approval of advance grading on
sites.
Virtually all of the Commissions concerns have been addressed in the final draft
of the regulation except that staff did not agree that advanced grading and
clearing requests should be approved by staff. This is a departure from the
framework of regulation originally recommended by the task force and adopted
by the Board.
June 9, 2005
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) LAND ALTERATION REGULATIONS
4
Finally, the draft mark-up of the regulation was presented to the Commission at
their informal meeting on May 19, 2005. While there were some questions, the
consensus appeared to be that the draft regulation was ready for Commission
action.
PLANS COMMITTEE: May 4, 2005
The draft regulation was presented and discussed at Plans committee. There
was some discussion of the proposed 20% fee increase. Staff stated that even
with the increase, it would not pay for the staff inspector for the program. The
new maximum permit fee would be $660.00 up from $550.00.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 9, 2005)
Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the revisions of
the Land Alteration Regulations. At the meeting, two (2) people spoke in
opposition to the revisions. One of the speakers, Mrs. Dottie Funk, a member of
the original regulation drafting task force, was please with the revisions in
general and stated the staff had done an exceptional job. She continued though
and spoke of concerns over the Planning Commission giving advanced grading
decisions and variances to exceed the cut and fill limits. She hoped that these
decisions would not create the same conditions that resulted in the drafting and
adoption of the regulations in the beginning. Lastly, Mrs. Funk stated she did not
believe that the penalty for violation of the regulations was strict enough.
The other speaker, Mrs. Kathleen Olson, League of Women Voters, stated she
did not think that the appeal process should stop at the Planning Commission
and believed Planning Commission decisions pertaining to the regulation should
be appealable to the BOD.
In response to these speakers, Commissioner Norm Floyd said the current
regulations seem to have shortfalls and the revisions appear to cover those loop
holes. He also stated that currently decisions by the Board of Adjustment are
also final and not appealable to the BOD. There was no further discussion of the
item. The Chair entertained a motion to approve the revisions. The motion
carried by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 noes.