pc_02 12 2004
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
FEBRUARY 12, 2004
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being eleven (11) in number.
II. Members Present: Pam Adcock
Chauncey Taylor
Gary Langlais
Norm Floyd
Mizan Rahman
Jerry Meyer
Fred Allen, Jr.
Darrin Williams
Bill Rector
Bob Lowry
Robert Stebbins
Members Absent: None
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the December 18, 2003 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
FEBRUARY 12, 2004
4:00 P.M.
I. DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Z-6782-B Second Baptist Church – Revised Conditional Use Permit
1709 John Barrow Road
B. Z-7512 Interstate 630 Self-Storage – Conditional Use Permit
5700 West 10th Street
C. Z-7551 Elliott Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
1100 N. Taylor Street
D. Z-7543 O’Donnell Day Care Family home – Special Use Permit
25 Overby Circle
E. Z-7548 Brooks Day Care Family home – Special Use Permit
6821 Fairfield Drive
F. G-23-331 Mary Street, Brack Avenue, Carl Street, Lucie Avenue and Alley
Right-of-Way Abandonments
G. Z-6742-A Miss Cat’s Child Development Center – Revised Conditional
Use Permit
8500 Mize Road
H. S-1400-A Watershed Project Subdivision Site Plan Review
Springer Street, South of I-440
II. NEW ITEMS:
1. Master Street Plan – repealing the current Master Street Plan and adopting a
new Master Street Plan for the Little Rock Planning Area
2. Z-7570 James Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
6805 Woodson Road
3. Z-7571 Moore Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
4024 Apple Avenue
Agenda, Page Two
II. NEW ITEMS: (CONT.)
4. Z-7572 Parks Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
2913 Ware Street
5. Z-4116-A Rezoning from R-2 to PD-I
8300 Kellett Road
6. Z-4336-R Rezonings from Various Districts to O-2
1000 Bishop Street
7. Z-7544-A Little Angels Daycare Center – Conditional Use Permit
4005 West 10th Street
8. Z-7565 Little Rock Compassion Center – Conditional Use Permit
3618 West Roosevelt Road
9. Z-7573 The Furniture Club Warehouse – Conditional Use Permit
6805 West 12th Street, Suite “D”
10. Proposed Ordinance Amendments regarding Special Use Permits and
Day Care Family Homes
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
NAME: Second Baptist Church – Revised Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION: 1709 John Barrow Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Second Baptist Church/Rev. Kevin Kelly
PROPOSAL: A revised conditional use permit is requested to allow
for expansion of a parking lot on this existing, R-2
zoned, 5± acre church site.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the east side of John Barrow Road, north of Labette
Drive.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The church has been a part of this neighborhood for many years. On
July 26, 2001, a C.U.P. was approved to allow for construction of a Family
Life Center and reconstruction of the existing parking lots. The church
has filled an area behind the rear parking lot and paved over the fill for
new parking. The new parking area has been located fairly near an
apartment development which is located behind the church. Although
there are concerns about the engineering of the fill and the reduction in
buffer, staff believes the parking lot expansion should not affect the
church’s continued compatibility with the neighborhood. Outstanding
Public Works and Landscape concerns must be resolved.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the John Barrow and
Brownwood Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The church’s sanctuary has a seating capacity of 550 persons, requiring
110 parking spaces (built prior to November 1, 1988). 144 spaces existed
at the time of the July 2001 C.U.P. approval. This expanded parking area
contains 51 additional parking spaces. Access to the new parking area is
through the existing rear parking lot.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
A total of eight (8) percent of the expanded parking area must be
landscaped with interior landscaping islands. To receive credit toward
fulfilling this requirement of the Landscape Ordinance, landscape islands
must be at least 150 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width. A redesign
of the parking area to accommodate this interior landscaping and to help
with vehicular circulation will be necessary.
A protective border to protect landscape areas from vehicular traffic is
required.
Much of the required thirty-six (36) foot wide land use buffer along the
eastern perimeter has been destroyed or will be due to compaction and
proposed benching and grading. Steps should be taken to protect and
preserve existing trees.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings are required to
screen this site from the residential properties to the east and south. This
screening must be located near the paved area due to its high-elevation.
Irrigation of landscaped areas is required. Prior to a construction permit
being issued, it will be necessary to provide approved landscape plans
stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. This parking lot was constructed without a grading permit as required
under the land alteration ordinance. Obtain a grading permit in
accordance with section 29-186(c) and (d) prior to any additional
grading activities at the site. Detailed site grading, and drainage plans
will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
2. Revise proposed grading plan to save all remaining trees. Some
parking spaces will be lost.
3. The existing slope already shows evidence of slope failure. During
construction, a registered, qualified professional engineer must
investigate and certify the long-term stability of the slopes.
4. All unsuitable fill materials including construction debris and tree trunks
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
3
must be removed from the fill as work progresses.
5. Evergreen tree planting will be required in accordance with the zoning
and land alteration ordinances, which ever is stringent.
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: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to
determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will
be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be
installed at the Developer’s expense.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments received.
CATA: No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 28, 2003)
Thomas Pownall and Rev. Kevin Kelly were present representing the application.
Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding
site lighting and fencing. Staff noted that the primary areas of concern were the
site work that had been done without proper permits and the paving that had
been done without landscaping. Public Works Comments were discussed at
length. It was noted that staff had concerns that improper fill material had been
used and the slope of the fill area was already failing. It was noted that much of
the required buffer area had been destroyed and many of these trees left
standing would likely die since the fill material had been placed around them.
The applicant was advised that the parking area would need to be redesigned to
accommodate Public Works and Landscape Comments. The applicant was
advised to prepare a plan addressing staff’s concerns. Staff stated the
Commission would then determine if it was appropriate to allow the parking lot
expansion and a specific time given to address the engineering and landscape
issues.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
4
The item was then forwarded to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On July 26, 2001, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit
allowing for construction of a Family Life Center building and reconstruction of
the existing parking lots on this R-2 zoned church site. Subsequent to
construction of the new facility, the church filled and paved an area behind (east)
the rear parking lot. This parking lot expansion was not included in the approved
C.U.P. The parking lot was constructed without an approved grading permit,
unsuitable fill materials may have been used and the slope of the fill already
show signs of failure. The parking area was constructed without concern for the
City’s landscape and buffer regulations. No interior landscaping, screening,
irrigation or curbs have been installed. Much of the required 36 foot wide land
use buffer along the east perimeter of the site has been destroyed or will be due
to compaction and proposed benching and grading.
Staff believes the parking lot is an appropriate use for this portion of the site and
could be compatible with the neighborhood. If the church had gone through the
proper steps including Commission approval, grading and landscape permitting
and appropriate construction and inspections. This might very well have been a
“non-issue”. As it is, the parking lot may yet be an appropriate use, if those
outstanding Public Works and Landscape concerns are resolved.
On September 3, 2003, the applicant submitted a revised site plan and
responses to staff issues raised at Subdivision Committee. The parking lot has
been redesigned to accommodate interior landscaping and appropriate stall and
driveway configuration. Shrubbery has been shown at the top of the slope on
the east perimeter of the parking lot to provide screening to the east. No
screening has been provided on the south perimeter. Curb and gutter has been
provided to protect the landscape areas. The applicant proposes to remove a
portion of the existing asphalt to help with the required slope stabilization and to
help preserve the existing trees.
The engineering questions related to the fill and slope have not been answered.
Staff believes the geotechnical report on the suitability and stability of the fill and
the new slope design need to be completed by the applicant prior to the
Commission considering the C.U.P. It may be that the results of that report
could lead to substantial revisions to the plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the October 30, 2003
Commission agenda. Staff believes it is imperative that the required engineering
report be completed and submitted to staff as soon as possible. A report should
be made no later than the October 9, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the item needed to be deferred to allow for the needed
engineering report to be completed. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
October 30, 2003 Commission meeting. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and
1 absent.
STAFF REPORT:
Mr. Dinwiddy, a deacon at Second Baptist Church was present at the October 9,
2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. He stated the engineering analysis had
not been completed. Mike Hood, of Public Works, stated he was aware that
borings were being made on the site as a component of that study. Staff
advised the Committee that the item should be deferred one more time to allow
for completion of the engineering report. The Committee concurred. Staff
believes the applicant should submit the report no later than the November 20,
2003 Subdivision Committee meeting allowing the Commission to take action at
its December 18, 2003 meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the required engineering report had not been submitted.
Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the December 18, 2003
Commission meeting with the engineering report to be submitted no later than
the November 20, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral by a vote
of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF REPORT:
The applicant’s engineer contacted staff and stated the engineering report was
not yet complete. Staff will support one last deferral until the February 12, 2004
meeting. If the report is not ready in time for the January 15, 2004 Subdivision
Committee meeting, staff will ask that the Commission deny or withdraw the
request, allowing enforcement to proceed. As required by the Commission’s
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
6
bylaws, the applicant will have to send new notices for the February 12, 2004
meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the required engineering report had not yet been presented
to staff. Staff recommended that the item be deferred one last time, to the
February 12, 2004 meeting; that the required engineering report be submitted
prior to the January 15, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting; and the applicant
send new notices to surrounding property owners for the February 12, 2004
meeting.
The application was placed on the Consent Agenda approved for deferral as
recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted the Geotechnical Report prepared by Grubbs, Hoskin,
Barton and Wyatt, Inc. consulting engineers. The report stated: “The stability of
the existing embankment is not considered adequate at this time. Options for
embankment remediation to improve slope stability include the following:
1. Provide a flatter slope for the uncontrolled existing fill by cutting back into
the existing parking lot.
2. Removal of the existing embankment fill and replacement with compacted
select fill.”
The applicant submitted a revised site plan in conjunction with the report.
The applicant’s engineer, Thomas Pownall of Thomas Engineering, appeared at
the January 15, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The results of the
geotechnical report and the revised site plan were discussed.
Mike Hood, of Public Works, noted that the revised slope needed to be modified
to a 3:1 slope. Mr. Hood stated that modification of the slope and remediation as
outlined in the geotechnical report would satisfy staff’s concerns about the fill
issue. He noted that the applicant’s plan did indicate appropriate measures to
be taken during regrading; including a silt fence and hay bales.
Bob Brown, Plans Review Administrator, indicated additional shrubbery and
trees were needed around the perimeter of the parking lot to provide screening.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6782-B
7
The applicant was advised to respond to the remaining staff issues by
January 21, 2004 and to resend notices for the February 12, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting.
On January 21, 2004, the applicant did submit a revised site plan which
addressed the remaining Public Works and Landscape Comments. The new
plan shows the required slope modification and landscape screening.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (Revised for February 12, 2004)
Staff recommends approval of the revised conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the approved site plan.
2. Compliance with staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and
6 of the Staff Report.
3. Compliance with the remediation plan outlined by the Geotechnical Report
and approved by Public Works.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
The applicants were 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 as revised for
February 12, 2004. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended
by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-7512
NAME: Interstate 620 Self Storage – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 5700 West 10th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Sidney Thom/Scott Richburg
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a mini-warehouse development on this
C-3 zoned, 4.7 acre tract.
STAFF REPORT:
On October 13, 2003, the applicant submitted a request that this item be
deferred to the December 18, 2003 commission meeting in order to pursue
resolution of the FEMA map revision issue. Staff recommends approval of the
deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the applicant had requested deferral of the item to the
December 18, 2003 meeting in order to pursue resolution of the FEMA map
issue. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred as recommended by
staff. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF REPORT:
The applicant has requested that this item be deferred to the February 12, 2003
Agenda in order to continue pursuing resolution of the FEMA issue. Staff
supports this one last deferral. If the item is not ready to be presented at the
February 12, 2004 meeting, it should be withdrawn and refiled at a later date. All
appropriate information should be submitted prior to the January 15, 2004
Subdivision Committee meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2003)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the applicant had requested that the item be deferred to the
February 12, 2004 agenda. Staff recommended approval of the deferral as
noted in the staff report above.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7512
2
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
February 12, 2004 meeting. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
STAFF REPORT:
The applicants appeared at the January 15, 2004 Subdivision Committee
meeting. They stated they were confident the FEMA issue would be resolved
soon and they were prepared to submit a revised site plan in response to FEMA
and Public Works concerns. They stated many of the variances had been
eliminated. They asked for one additional deferral, to the March 25, 2004
meeting. Staff advised the applicants that the revised site plan would need to be
submitted for staff review and the item would be scheduled for the March 4, 2004
Subdivision Committee meeting, if the deferral were granted.
It was the unanimous consensus of the Committee that one additional deferral
would be appropriate. The item was forwarded to the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff presented the item and recommended that it be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Commission meeting. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral by a vote
of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-7551
Name: Elliott Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
Location: 1100 North Taylor Street
Applicant: Heather Elliott/Patrick McGetrick
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care
Family Home to be operated in the single family residence
located on the R-2 zoned property at 1100 North Taylor
Street.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents located
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Hillcrest and Prospect Terrace
Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
1100 North Taylor Street is located on the west side of North Taylor, at its
intersection with “J” Street. All surrounding properties are zoned R-2 and are
occupied by single family residences. Forest Heights Jr. High School is located
one block to the west. Holy Souls Church and School and the Francis Allen
School are located two blocks to the southeast. An MF-12 zoned condominium
development is located one block to the northwest.
The applicant’s home is a one-story, frame and stucco structure and is typical of
homes in the neighborhood. The property shares a deep, double-wide driveway,
constructed in the undeveloped “J” Street right-of-way, with the property to the
south. The portion of the rear yard nearest the house is fenced for use as a play
area. The remainder of the rear yard is wooded. North Taylor Street, at this
location, is broad with curb and gutter on both sides. The street does not appear
to be heavily traveled.
The applicant currently keeps 4 children. Keeping up to 5 children does not
require regulation by the City. She proposes keeping no more than 10 children
but likely will have 6-8 children on most days. Hours of operation are proposed
as Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. – 5:30 p.m. The applicant will be the sole
caregiver. On the rare occasion when the applicant cannot keep the children
(Doctor’s appointment, etc…). A substitute (family member) will come to the
residence and watch over the children.
The principal use of the property will remain single family residential. No signage
beyond that permitted in single family zones will be permitted. The applicant will
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7551
2
apply for a license from the State Department of Human Services upon receiving
approval from the City. The applicant’s Engineer has stated there is no longer a
valid bill of assurance for this subdivision; Hollenberg Addition.
Section 36-54(e)(3) of the City of Little Rock Zoning Ordinance establishes the
site and location criteria for day care family homes as follows:
a. This use may be located only in a single family home, occupied by the care
giver.
b. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of
Arkansas. State regulations shall control the number of employees residing
off premises.
c. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers.
d. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from
households other than the care givers.
e. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care
centers are not allowed by right.
Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be
transferred from owner to owner, location to location or use to use.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this
application. Staff feels that the proposed day care family home at this location
will have no adverse impact on the general area.
Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care family
home at 1100 North Taylor Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section
36-54(e)(3).
2. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
3. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to day-light
hours.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2003)
Patrick McGetrick was present representing the application. There were several
objectors present. At this point, only 8 commissioners were present. As is the
Commission’s practice, the applicant was offered the opportunity to defer.
Mr. McGetrick requested the deferral.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7551
3
A motion was made to defer the item to the February 12, 2004 meeting. The
motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 noes and 3 absent.
After the vote, one of the objectors presented a petition in opposition to the
proposed day care family home.
STAFF UPDATE:
On January 6, 2004, the Board of Directors directed staff to put a hold on all day
care family home applications, and begin a review of the Zoning Ordinance
standards related to day care family homes, to determine if any ordinance
amendments are needed. The Planning Staff and Plans Committee have
reviewed the ordinance, and proposed amendments are on the February 12,
2004 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Staff anticipates the
ordinance amendments being presented to the Board of Directors on March 16,
2004. Therefore, staff requests that this application be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Planning Commission agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application, along with the other day care
family home – special use permits on this agenda, needed to be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Planning Commission agenda pending completion of the review
of Ordinance regulations regarding day care family homes and special use
permits.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7543
Name: O’Donnell Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
Location: 25 Overby Circle
Applicant: Linda O’Donnell
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care
Family Home to be operated in the single family residence
located on the R-2 zoned property at 25 Overby Circle.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents located
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Treasure Hills Neighborhood
Association were notified of the public hearing.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
25 Overby Circle is located on the south side of Overby Circle east of Vinson
Street, within the Treasure Hills Subdivision. All surrounding properties are
zoned R-2 and contain single family residences. There is a mixture of
commercial uses along Rodney Parham Road to the north and east.
The applicant’s home is a two-story brick and frame structure and is typical of
those in the general area. There is a two-car driveway from Overby Circle, with
parking for at least four vehicles. The rear yard is fenced and provides a safe
play area. The applicant proposes to operate the day care from 9:00 a.m. to
2:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. The applicant has noted that she has no
employees.
The applicant has operated a day care family home at this address for 7 ½
years. The applicant has noted that she currently cares for 10 children. The
applicant has also noted that most of the children she cares for live in nearby
surrounding neighborhoods.
The principal use of the property will remain single family residential. No signage
beyond that allowed in single family zones will be permitted. The applicant has
noted that she is licensed by the State Department of Human Services. The
applicant submitted a copy of the Bill of Assurance for this neighborhood which
was recorded in 1965 and appears to still be in effect. The Bill of Assurance
contains the following language:
“I. Except for Park Tracts A and B which are to be used by
owners of lots in all sections of Treasure Hills Subdivision, their
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7543
2
guests and others having their permission, for recreational
purposes; lots in this Section 3 may be used only for residential
purposes. No building shall be, erected, altered, placed or
permitted to remain on such residential lot other than and single
family dwelling not to exceed two and one-half stories in height
and a private garage for not more than two cars.”
Section 36-54(e)(3) of the City of Little Rock Zoning Ordinance establishes the
site and location criteria for day care family homes as follows:
a. This use may be located only in a single family home, occupied by the care
giver.
b. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of
Arkansas. State regulations shall control the number of employees residing
off premises.
c. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers.
d. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from
households other than the care givers.
e. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care
centers are not allowed by right.
Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be
transferred from owner to owner, location to location or use to use.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this
application. Staff feels that the proposed day care family home at this location
will have no adverse impact on the general area. To staff’s knowledge, no
complaints from neighbors have been received as long as the day care use has
been located on the property (7 ½ years).
Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care family
home at 25 Overby Circle, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section
36-54(e)(3).
2. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
3. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to day-light
hours.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested the application
to be deferred to the February 12, 2004 Agenda, due to the fact that she became
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7543
3
aware of a petition of opposition on the date of the public hearing. Staff noted
that the applicant wished to have a neighborhood meeting with the opposition.
Staff supported the deferral request.
With a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays, 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 February 12, 2004 Agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
STAFF UPDATE:
On January 6, 2004, the Board of Directors directed staff to put a hold on all day
care family home applications, and begin a review of the Zoning Ordinance
standards related to day care family homes, to determine if any ordinance
amendments are needed. The Planning Staff and Plans Committee have
reviewed the ordinance, and proposed amendments are on the February 12,
2004 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Staff anticipates the
ordinance amendments being presented to the Board of Directors on March 16,
2004. Therefore, staff requests that this application be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Planning Commission agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application, along with the other day care
family home – special use permits on this agenda, needed to be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Planning Commission agenda pending completion of the review
of Ordinance regulations regarding day care family homes and special use
permits.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-7548
Name: Brooks Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
Location: 6821 Fairfield Drive
Applicant: Algin Brooks
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care
Family Home to be operated in the single family residence
located on the R-2 zoned property at 6821 Fairfield Drive.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents located
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Chicot and SWLR United for
Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
6821 Fairfield Drive is located on the south side of Fairfield Drive, between
Dailey Drive and Warren Drive. All surrounding properties are zoned R-2 and
contain single family residences.
The applicant’s home is a one-story brick and frame structure and is typical of
those in the general area. There is a one-car driveway (with gravel extension)
from Fairfield Drive, with parking for four vehicles. The rear yard is fenced and
provides a safe play area. The applicant proposes to operate the day care from
6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The applicant notes that her two
(2) daughters will help care for the children. The applicant also notes that the
day care family home is not yet in operation at this location. The applicant is
awaiting City approval prior to opening.
The principal use of the property will remain single family residential. No signage
beyond that allowed in single family zones will be permitted. The applicant has
noted that she is licensed by the State Department of Human Services. The
applicant met with personnel of the Pulaski County Circuit Clerk Recorder’s
Office and was unable to locate a Bill of Assurance for this neighborhood.
Section 36-54(e)(3) of the City of Little Rock Zoning Ordinance establishes the
site and location criteria for day care family homes as follows:
a. This use may be located only in a single family home, occupied by the care
giver.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7548
2
b. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of
Arkansas. State regulations shall control the number of employees residing
off premises.
c. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers.
d. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from
households other than the care givers.
e. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care
centers are not allowed by right.
Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be
transferred from owner to owner, location to location or use to use.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this
application. Staff feels that the proposed day care family home at this location
will have no adverse impact on the general area.
Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care family
home at 6821 Fairfield Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section
36-54(e)(3).
2. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
3. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to day-light
hours.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant notified several of the
surrounding property owners several days late. Staff suggested that the
application be deferred to the February 12, 2004 Agenda.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the February 12, 2004 Agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred. Staff noted that the applicant would need to re-notify
the surrounding property owners.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7548
3
STAFF UPDATE:
On January 6, 2004, the Board of Directors directed staff to put a hold on all day
care family home applications, and begin a review of the Zoning Ordinance
standards related to day care family homes, to determine if any ordinance
amendments are needed. The Planning Staff and Plans Committee have
reviewed the ordinance, and proposed amendments are on the February 12,
2004 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Staff anticipates the
ordinance amendments being presented to the Board of Directors on March 16,
2004. Therefore, staff requests that this application be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Planning Commission agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application, along with the other day care
family home – special use permits on this agenda, needed to be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Planning Commission agenda pending completion of the review
of Ordinance regulations regarding day care family homes and special use
permits.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: G-23-331
Name: Mary Street, Brack Avenue, Carl Street, Lucie Avenue and
Alley Right-of-Way Abandonments
Location: North of Asher Avenue to Lucie Avenue, west of
S. Monroe Street
Owner/Applicant: Various Abutting Owners/Kaufman Lumber Co. by
White-Daters and Associates
Request: To abandon portions of the following rights-of-way:
• Mary Street – between Asher Avenue and Lucie Avenue
• Brack Avenue – between Mary Street and S. Monroe
Street
• Carl Street – between Brack Avenue and Lucie Avenue
• Lucie Avenue – between Mary Street and Carl Street
• Alley Right-of-Way – within Block 25, Brack Addition
(between Brack Avenue and Lucie Avenue)
STAFF REVIEW:
A. Public Need for these Rights-of-Way:
As noted in paragraph G. of this report, all of the public utility companies
consent to the right-of-way abandonments. All of the areas to be
abandoned are requested to be retained as utility easements. The Public
Works Comments are as follows:
1. Public Works has no objection to the proposed street closures.
Drainage easements need to be maintained in the former rights-of-way
to convey storm water from adjacent property.
B. Master Street Plan:
The Master Street Plan classifies Mary Street, Brack Avenue, Carl Street
and Lucie Avenue as local streets. Abandonment of these rights-of-way
will not adversely affect the Master Street Plan, as they are not classified
as collector streets or higher.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-331
2
C. Characteristics of Right-of-Way Terrain:
Mary Street between Asher Avenue and Lucie Avenue is a narrow paved
street with some curbs and gutters. Brack Avenue, Carl Street and Lucie
Avenue are also narrow paved streets with open ditches. The north/south
alley right-of-way between Brack Avenue and Lucie Avenue is
undeveloped.
D. Development Potential:
Once abandoned, the areas of right-of-way will be incorporated into the
adjacent properties, and will allow the expansion of the Kaufman Lumber
Company facilities.
E. Neighborhood and Land Use Effect:
The general area is occupied by a mixture of uses and zoning. There is a
multifamily development located along the west side of Mary Street. This
development does not utilize Mary Street for access. If the
abandonments are approved, the properties to the north and west will
have direct access to Fair Park Blvd. via Lucie Avenue and West 32nd
Street. Additionally, S. Harrison Street runs north from West 32nd Street
to West 29th Street, the nearest collector street. The properties to the
east will not be affected, as they will continue to have direct access to
Asher Avenue via S. Monroe Street.
F. Neighborhood Position:
The Curran-Conway and Midway Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the abandonment request. Additionally, all abutting property
owners were notified of the request. As of this writing, staff knows of no
objection to the abandonments.
G. Effect on Public Services or Utilities:
Central Arkansas Water: Retain Mary Street, Carl Street, and Brack
Avenue rights-of-way as utility easement. There are existing public water
mains within these rights-of-way.
Little Rock Wastewater Utility:
• Lucie Street from Mary Street East to Carl Street – No objection to
abandonment but an easement must be retained for an existing 6”
main crossing Lucie Street in the middle of the block.
• Mary Street from Asher Avenue north to Lucie Street – No
objection to abandonment but an easement must be retained for an
existing 6” main crossing Mary Street in the vicinity of Brack Street.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-331
3
• Brack Street from Mary Street east to S. Monroe Street – No
objection to abandonment but an easement must be retained for an
existing 6” and 8” main located in Brack Street. Minimum 10-foot
easement required.
• North South Alley running from Brack Street to Lucie Street located
in the block between Mary Street on the west and Carl Street on
the east – No objection to abandonment but an easement must be
retained for an existing 6” main located in the alley.
• Carl Street from Brack Street to Lucie Street – No objection to
abandonment but an easement must be retained for an existing 8”
main located in Carl Street in the vicinity of Brack Street.
Southwestern Bell: Before right-of-way abandonment can be approved,
Southwestern Bell would require a 10 foot easement for cable on the
north side of Brack Avenue from S. Monroe Street to Mary Street and
crossing Brack Avenue on the east side of Mary Street to the
Southwestern Bell pedestal stenciled FB 5124.
Entergy: No Comments received.
Centerpoint Energy (Arkla): No Comments received.
H. Reversionary Rights:
All reversionary rights will extend to the adjacent property owners.
I. Public Welfare and Safety Issues:
Abandoning these street and alley rights-of-way will have no adverse
affect on the public welfare and safety. The Little Rock Fire Department
has no objection to the abandonments, but notes that fire hydrants must
be placed as per city code.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Mary Street, Brack Avenue, Carl Street, Lucie
Avenue and alley (Block 25, Brack Addition) abandonments, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The areas of abandonment must be retained as utility and drainage
easements.
2. Compliance with the comments as noted in paragraphs A, G and I of this
report.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-331
4
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 20, 2003)
Joe White was present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the
proposed right-of-way abandonments. Staff explained that if the abandonments
are approved, adequate vehicular circulation and access would exist for the
properties to the north, west and east.
The Committee briefly discussed the proposed abandonments. After the
discussion, the Committee forwarded the issue to the full Commission for
resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter on
December 10, 2003 requesting that the application be deferred to the
February 12, 2004 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the February 12, 2004 Agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the March 25, 2004 agenda. Staff supported
the deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
NAME: Miss Cat’s Child Development Center –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 8500 Mize Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Beulah Turner
PROPOSAL: A revised conditional use permit is requested to allow
for the expansion of uses and activities related to the
existing day care center on this R-2 zoned 4.6± acre
tract.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the northern terminus of Mize Road, 3 to 4
blocks north of Baseline Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located at the fringe of a predominantly single family
neighborhood. R-2 zoned, single family residences are located south of
the site, extending to Baseline Road. Single family homes are located to
the north and a small mobile home park is adjacent to the west. The
property immediately to the east is vacant. Nonresidential uses are
located in the general vicinity along Avery Road, Scott Hamilton and
Baseline. This site is occupied by a building that formerly housed a
nursing home. The nonconforming nursing home was annexed into the
City in 1985. Staff does feel there is some sensitivity to the site due to its
proximity to the residential uses and the fact that access to the site is
through the residential neighborhood. Allowing an increase in activity
beyond the previously approved day care center could have a negative
impact on the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Upper Baseline and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site is accessed via a single driveway off of the end of Mize Road.
That driveway also provides access to the adjacent mobile home park.
There appear to be 51 parking spaces on the site. The previously
approved day care with 150 children, 11 employees and 6 day care vans
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
2
requires 32 parking spaces. The additional proposed uses; 8 additional
vans, an adult day care for 50 clients and 15 employees and a transitional
foster care program for 30 children and 10 employees require an
additional 41 parking spaces. The duplex on the site requires 3 spaces
and allowing conversion of a portion of the large building into 2
apartments requires 2 more spaces for a total required number of 78
parking spaces.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
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: Approved as submitted.
Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to
determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will
be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be
installed at the Developer’s expense.
Fire Department: This proposed use must pass a fire department day
care inspection.
County Planning: No Comments received.
CATA: No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 28, 2003)
The applicant, Beulah Turner, was present. Staff presented the item and noted
there were no site plan issues. Staff made note of the applicant’s cover letter in
which she outlined the proposed changes from the previously approved C.U.P.
Commissioner Rector asked Ms. Turner if it was possible for the vans to use
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
3
Jamison Road, adjacent to the east, rather than Mize Road. Ms. Turner
responded that she had no driveway extending to Jamison Road, which was
itself not much more than a trail. Staff noted that they would look into the issue.
The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned, 4.7± acre tract located at 8500 Mize Road is occupied by a
34,000 square foot, one-story, frame and masonry, institutional building and a
two-story, frame and masonry, duplex residential structure. The larger structure
formerly housed a nursing home. The nursing home was nonconforming, having
been annexed into the City in 1985. The nursing home closed and on
September 30, 1999, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use
permit to allow a day care center to be operated in the building. The
Commission specifically approved a day care for 150 children with 11 full-time
employees. The applicant, Beulah Turner, proposed to occupy the duplex. The
day care was approved to use 6 vans to transport the children. Hours of
operation were approved as Monday – Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.
In response to complaints from neighborhood residents, staff conducted an
investigation of the site and determined that activities on the site had increased
beyond what was approved by the Commission. A cook, night watchman and
Ms. Turner now have apartments in the former nursing home building.
Ms. Turner has increased the number of vans to 14 and is using the vans for
both the day care and for a Medicaid transportation provider service. The
building is being used for activities and gatherings other than those related to the
day care; such as church gatherings and Turner family gatherings. After being
advised that she was in violation of the approved C.U.P., Ms. Turner filed this
amended C.U.P. application.
In addition to the day care as approved on September 30, 1999, Ms. Turner is
now asking that the following changes be approved:
• Daycare hours be increased from Monday – Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m. to
24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
• Apartments within the larger building for Ms. Turner and the night watchman
and cook.
• That gatherings such as church fellowships and family gatherings be
permitted to be held in the building.
• Addition of an adult day care for 50 clients with 15 employees to be operated
Monday – Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
4
• Addition of a transitional foster home for 30 children with 10 employees to be
operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
• Increase the number of vans to 14 to be used for the day care and the
Medicaid transportation provider service. Transportation to be run Monday –
Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
No changes are proposed to the site. There is no bill of assurance that covers
this property.
Staff is not supportive of allowing activities on the site to expand beyond those
approved by the Commission on September 30, 1999. The site is in close
proximity to a single family neighborhood and access to the site is through that
neighborhood. The increase in traffic generated by the proposed uses would
negatively impact the neighborhood. Additionally, allowing multiple uses to
locate on the site greatly changes the dynamics of the property. The amount of
activity on the site would increase beyond that on the site even when it was
occupied by the nursing home. That increased level of activity is not appropriate
for this site.
Beyond the issue of the level of activity on the site, the traffic issue could
possibly be mitigated somewhat by putting a driveway through the east portion of
the site to Jamison Road. Access could then be gained to I-30 and to Scott
Hamilton via Avery. Concerns with that option are the substandard condition of
Jamison Road and the difficulty in monitoring and enforcing any requirement that
Jamison be used.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 2003)
The applicant was present. There were several objectors present. Numerous
letters of opposition had been received and forwarded to the Commission. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of denial. Staff informed the
Commission that the required notices had been sent by the applicant 8 days
prior to the Commission meeting, not 15 days as required by the Commission’s
bylaws. Staff surmised that the number of letters received and the number of
neighborhood residents present were evidence that there was adequate notice of
the proposal. Chairman Nunnley asked Pat Gee, president of the Upper
Baseline Neighborhood Association, for her opinion on the notice issue.
Ms. Gee responded that the neighborhood had adequate notice of the issue as
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
5
evidenced by the large number of residents present at the meeting. She asked
the Commission to proceed with hearing the item. A motion was then made to
waive the Commission’s bylaws and to accept the late notice. The motion
passed with a vote of 10 ayes, 1 noe and 0 absent.
Chairman Nunnley asked if the violations noted in the agenda still existed. Dana
Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that there were still violations, but that
the neighbors could better address the specifics.
The applicant, Beulah Turner, addressed the Commission. She stated the day
care only occupied a small portion of the building and she needed the additional
uses to help pay for the property. Ms. Turner stated the additional day care
hours were needed to accommodate parents who worked evenings and nights.
She stated the cook and night watchman stay in one of the rooms and that did
not constitute an apartment. Ms. Turner stated their presence had helped
reduce crime on the site after hours. She stated her church had met at the site
for special gatherings and the day care had programs as well. Ms. Turner
repeated that the adult day care program was needed to help pay for the
building. She stated she would no longer pursue the foster care program.
Ms. Turner concluded by stating the vans were used for both the day care and
Medicaid transportation program.
Robert Gipson, of 13 Rocco Drive, stated the day care was already too large and
generated too much traffic in the neighborhood.
Dorothy Neighbors, of 8504 Mize Road #2, stated she had lived next door for 21
years. Ms. Neighbors voiced several concerns; including persons blocking her
driveway, a late-night party on the site in July, a person performing a lewd act in
her sight and Ms. Turner’s threats to prohibit access through the day care
property to Ms. Neighbor’s home.
Susie Drennan, of 20 Rocco Road, stated there was too much traffic generated
by Ms. Turner’s business. She stated there were 15-20 vehicles parked on the
site every night.
Mattie Watson, of 4 Hogan Drive, presented copies of letters and a petition
signed by neighborhood residents in opposition to the proposal.
Nan Howard, of 3 Hogan Drive, voiced her opposition. She stated hers used to
be a quiet neighborhood prior to Ms. Turner starting her business.
Richard Monday, of 5 Hogan Drive, voiced his opposition.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
6
Janet Berry, president of SWLR United for Progress, stated the membership of
her organization had voted to oppose this application. She reiterated the
neighbor’s concerns about traffic, noise and after hours activities.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County, stated the League
was usually in support of day cares as providing a needed service for working
mothers. She stated the day care, as approved in 1999, seemed a reasonable
use but these additional uses were inappropriate for this site.
Pat Gee, president of the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association, spoke in
opposition and presented photographs of vehicles on the site. She stated the
Little Rock Police Department had no record of break-ins at the site, invalidating
Ms. Turner’s claim that the night watchman was needed in response to crime on
the site. She stated recent traffic counts show 934 vehicles a day use Mize
Road, much more than is typical for a 3 block long, dead-end residential street.
Ms. Gee concluded by stating that Ms. Turner had not fulfilled all that she was
required to from her 1999 approval.
Ms. Turner responded by stating that some of the traffic on Mize Road was
caused by persons trying to find the nearby City of Little Rock impound lot. She
stated she could open a driveway onto Jamison Road, thereby relieving some
traffic on Mize Road. Ms. Turner stated she could not control the acts of every
person who comes onto her property and she urged Ms. Neighbors to call the
police when she observes a lewd act taking place. Ms. Turner stated it was
preferable to have the other uses rather than see the building fall down from
disuse.
Commissioner Lowry asked what had not been fulfilled from the 1999 approval.
Dana Carney responded that, other than for the way Ms. Turner was using the
property, he was not sure. He stated he was not sure if the required public
access easements had been recorded. Ms. Turner stated the easements had
been dedicated; that she had worked with Tad Borkowski of Public Works to
fulfill that requirement.
In the following discussion with Ms. Turner and members of the Commission,
she stated she was not aware she could not expand operations on the site.
Chairman Nunnley told Ms. Turner she had gone beyond what was approved in
1999.
There was then a discussion of the number of employees and children on the
site.
Chairman Nunnley asked Ms. Turner if she now understood that she was bound
by what was approved in 1999. Ms. Turner responded that she did.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
7
Pat Gee stated it was not the neighborhood’s intent to run Ms. Turner out of
business; that they did want the old building to be used. She stated the
neighbors did have concerns about traffic.
Commissioner Faust asked Ms. Turner if she was now amending the application
to reduce the adult day care to 30 clients and to drop the foster care program.
Ms. Turner responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Faust asked Ms. Turner to elaborate on what happened in July,
referring to the party alleged by Ms. Neighbors. Ms. Turner stated she hosted a
church gathering after a funeral and some of the persons may have blocked
Ms. Neighbors’ driveway.
In response to a question, Ms. Turner stated she would like to keep the request
to expand the day care hours to 24/7.
Chairman Nunnley stated he was not comfortable dealing with this issue at this
time, with issues still being discussed. He asked if Ms. Turner was willing to
meet with the neighbors to discuss their concerns. Ms. Turner responded that
she would. Pat Gee stated the neighbors would prefer not to be put in that
position.
There was then a discussion of the actual scope of the application.
Commissioner Rector told Ms. Turner that he felt she was unsure of the process;
that she was not sure what she wanted. He told her she had to be specific in her
request.
Chairman Nunnley asked if Ms. Turner could withdraw her application. Deputy
City Attorney Cindy Dawson responded that she could but she was under
enforcement for violating the provisions of the 1999 approval. Commissioner
Rector stated Ms. Turner could defer. Ms. Dawson stated the Commission
needed to have the application clarified.
Dana Carney stated the issue was not that confusing. He stated the
Commission needed to go down the list of those items requested by Ms. Turner
and have her confirm, item by item, what was now being requested. Mr. Carney
stated Ms. Turner was not a neophyte when it came to this process; that she had
been before the Commission on at least 3 prior occasions for this site and other
sites where she had day care operations.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
8
Commissioner Faust went item by item with Ms. Turner and determined the
amended application to now be:
• The day care as approved in 1999 with 150 children and 11 employees.
• Day care hours to remain as Monday – Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.
• The cook and night watchman and their two children be permitted to live in
the building.
• No gatherings such as church fellowships and family gatherings be permitted
in the building. There will be occasional day care programs.
• No adult day care
• No foster care program
• Increase the number of vans from 6 to 14 to be used for the day care and the
Medicaid transportation provider service. Transportation to be run Monday –
Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
• The number of employees be increased from 11 to 17.
• A driveway is to be installed onto Jamison Road.
When asked to respond, Pat Gee stated the neighbors would be comfortable
with the increased number of vans, if the driveway onto Jamison Road was used.
Robert Gipson voiced opposition to the driveway if it would run directly behind his
home.
Robert Stebbins stated he was uncomfortable voting on a “moving target” and
called the question.
Commissioner Rector made a motion to approve the application as amended as
follows:
• Day care as approved in 1999
• The cook, night watchman and their two children may live in the building.
• The number of employees be increased from 11 to 17.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
9
• The addition of the Medicaid transportation provider service
• The number of vans be increased from 6 to 14.
• A driveway is to be installed from Ms. Turner’s property onto Jamison Road
within 30 days.
The vote on the motion was 4 ayes, 6 noes and 1 absent. The motion failed.
When Ms. Turner asked what she must now do, Chairman Nunnley responded
that she must conform to the 1999 Conditional Use Permit approval. It was
noted that Ms. Turner could appeal to the Board of Directors.
STAFF REPORT:
(For February 12, 2004 Planning Commission meeting)
Ms. Beulah Turner, the applicant, appealed the Planning Commission’s denial to
the Board of Directors. The public hearing was scheduled for November 18,
2003. The Board directed that a neighborhood meeting be held. A meeting was
held on December 1, 2003 at the Dee Brown Library at 6325 Baseline Road.
There were numerous neighborhood residents present. During the meeting, a
consensus was reached on an amended application. The amended application
was then presented to the Board of Directors at their December 2, 2003 meeting.
The application, as amended, is as follows:
1. 150 Children
2. 40 Employees including:
18 Teachers
3 Aids
2 Cooks
1 Janitor
1 Assistant Director
1 Groundskeeper
14 Van Drivers
3. The applicant is approved to live in the duplex. No one will occupy the
large building.
4. Hours of operation are to be 6:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m., Monday – Friday.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
10
5. Addition of the Medicaid transportation provider service in conjunction with
the day care
(a.) The transportation provider service is to only be a Medicaid
transportation provider service and it is to be conducted away
from the 8500 Mize Road location
6. The number of vans is to be increased to 16 to be used in conjunction
with the day care center and the Medicaid transportation provider service.
7. Staff will conduct unannounced, monthly inspections of the site for a
period of one (1) year to assure compliance with all conditions.
8. No separate driveway will be required from the site onto Jamison Road.
The consensus from the December 1, 2003 neighborhood meeting did not carry
over to the December 2, 2003 Board meeting. During its discussion of the issue,
the Board determined that the amended application before them was
substantially different from the application voted on by the Planning Commission
on September 18, 2003. The Board voted to send the issue back to the
Planning Commission. Staff sent notices to all interested parties of the
February 12, 2004 Commission meeting date.
Two issues have been resolved. A passageway easement from Mize Road,
through this site to the mobile home park, was dedicated in 1979 and is recorded
as instrument no. 79-07279. A 40’ X 80’ easement for a hammerhead
turnaround, utility or drainage facilities was dedicated and recorded on
January 3, 2000 as instrument no. 2000000045.
Staff does recommend approval of the amended application as agreed to at
the December 1, 2003 neighborhood meeting and presented at the December 2,
2003 Board of Directors’ meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were several interested parties present, but
no objectors. Staff presented the item and recommended approval as noted
above. In response to a question from the Commission, Dana Carney of the
Planning Staff identified the differences between the application now before the
Commission and that acted on at the September 18, 2003 commission meeting.
The applicant, Beulah Turner, deferred speaking until after hearing from the
other persons present.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6742-A
11
Pat Gee, president of the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association, stated the
Association had met with Ms. Turner earlier in the week and Ms. Turner stated
she would do “anything she could to work with the neighborhood.” Ms. Gee
stated Ms. Turner had removed the “no trespassing” signs and had made an
area available for vehicles to turn around. Ms. Gee stated traffic to the site had
been reduced considerably. She stated she thought a driveway onto Jamison
Road would help but some neighbors were opposed to having a driveway behind
their homes. Ms. Gee asked the Commission to “play Solomon.”
Commissioner Lowry asked if the people living on Jamison Road were opposed
to having the driveway. Ms. Gee responded that no one lived on Jamison Road.
During the ensuing discussion of the driveway issue, Dana Carney noted that,
although staff’s recommendation did not include a driveway onto Jamison Road,
the issue was still on the table.
Mattie Gibson, of 4 Hogan, stated she had no objection to a driveway onto
Jamison Road. She also noted that traffic to the site had lessened.
Nan Howard, of 3 Hogan Drive, stated she had no objection to the driveway and
she agreed with Ms. Gee.
Susie Drennan, of 20 Rocco, stated she had no objection to a driveway as long
as it was not directly behind the homes on Rocco.
In response to a question from Commissioner Lowry, Mr. Carney stated staff
would support a driveway located nearer the north perimeter of the site for use
by the Center’s vans, not the general public.
Ms. Turner stated she would construct a driveway away from the homes on
Rocco and the driveway would be gated after hours. She stated her van drivers
would be instructed to use Jamison Road.
In response to a question from Commissioner Lowry, Ms. Turner confirmed that
she was amending her application to include the driveway as she described.
Commissioner Floyd suggested that the monthly inspections by staff not all be
during working hours.
A motion was then made to approve the application, as amended. The motion
was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
The Commission then commended the parties involved for working together to
resolve the issue.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: S-1400-A
NAME: Watershed Project Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Springer Boulevard, south of I-440
DEVELOPER:
Watershed
3701 Springer Boulevard
Little Rock, AR 72201
ENGINEER:
McGetrick & McGetrick
319 President Clinton Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 9.67 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 24 – Sweet Home
CENSUS TRACT: 40.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Fence height variance adjacent to Springer
Boulevard.
A waiver of the required land use buffer screening along the southern property line.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant submitted a request to the Commission to be heard at their September 4,
2003 Public Hearing. Staff recommended the item be deferred until the applicant could
resolve the issues related to the floodway. The item was withdrawn at the December 4,
2003 Public Hearing because it did not appear the applicant would be able to resolve
the issues in a timely manner. The applicant has since received a clearance letter from
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400-A
2
the US Army Corp of Engineers allowing development on all but a small portion of the
site. The applicant has indicated no construction will take place on the area remaining
in the floodway and will dedicate all required easements to the City.
A. PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the construction of 52 units of multi-family housing on
the site. The development will be geared toward low income renters. The
applicant proposes the placement of two and three bedroom units on the site.
There are 26 two bedroom units and 26 three bedroom units on the site; two of
each bedroom mix is proposed as fully accessible.
The applicant is proposing the maximum building height of 33.5 feet. The
applicant has also indicated a single development sign located near the northern
driveway. The applicant has indicated the sign will be consistent with signage
allowed in multi-family zones.
The applicant proposes the placement of 121 parking spaces on site to serve the
development. The applicant has indicated the parking ratio as 2.24 spaces per
unit.
The applicant is proposing the placement of a brick and steel fence around the
development. The fence is proposed at six feet in height. The applicant is
requesting a variance to allow an increased fence height in the building setback.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant site with trees located around the perimeter of the site.
There is a small strip retail center located on the southeastern portion of the site.
The southern boundary of the site is a Union Pacific Railroad line.
Watershed is located east of the site across Springer Boulevard. The area to the
west of the site is vacant and is the Fourche Creek floodway.
There are three bill boards located on the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
owners of property located within 200-feet of the proposed site along with the
Granite Mountain Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. All of this land lies within the mapped floodway of Fourche Creek. Staff does
not believe it is appropriate to approve the proposed project until a conditional
letter of flood map revision is obtained from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. If the letter is obtained, the entire site will have to be
raised above the 100-year floodplain elevation.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400-A
3
2. Springer / Confederate Boulevard is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial. A minimum dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline
will be required.
3. With the planned development, provide design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street
including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development.
4. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section
8-283 prior to any filling, grading, land clearing or construction.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield).
6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The criteria for an arterial is 300
feet center to center and 150 feet from property line. The width of driveway
must not exceed 36 feet.
8. Alteration of the water course and wetlands clearance will require approval
from the Little Rock District of the US Army Corps of Engineers prior to start
of work.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, Capacity Contribution Analysis required. Contact
the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Additional interior easements will be required for electrical distribution
(underground). The exact location cannot be determined at this time.
Contact Entergy at 954-5158 for additional details.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
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. Additional fire hydrant(s)
and/or on site fire protection may be required. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in
addition to normal charges. This development will have minor impact on
existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to
provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400-A
4
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: At least two additional landscape islands are required within the
interior of the proposed long parking lot to help break up the sea of asphalt.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
adjacent residential properties.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide approved
landscape plans stamped with seal of a Registered Landscape Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 8, 2004)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff briefly described
the proposed development indicating the applicant had received clearance from
the US Army Corp of Engineers for development in the area. Staff indicted the
site plan had not changed since the original submission.
Staff noted the southern most driveway was located to near the property line.
Mr. McGetrick indicated his clients desire was to request the Commission allow a
variance from the minimum driveway spacing requirements to allow the driveway
to remain in the indicated location.
There was no further discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item to the
full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The proposed site plan indicates a maximum building height of 33.5 feet and a
rear building setback has been dimension from the proposed fence. The site is a
large tract extending to the west. The proposed building setbacks are more than
adequate to meet the minimum building setback requirement.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1400-A
5
The applicant has indicated the development will be surrounded in a brick and
iron fence. The site is a cleared site and has no natural screening in place.
There is an existing commercial structure located on the southern portion of the
site. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required land use buffer
required screening. The applicant has indicated the site is located adjacent to a
one hundred foot railroad right-of-way on the south and a floodway on the north
and west. The applicant has also indicated security as a concern and the
screening would not allow for policing of the site. Staff feels this request is
reasonable and recommends approval of the requested waiver of the screening
requirement.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow an increased fence height
adjacent to Springer Boulevard. The fence proposed is six-feet and the
maximum fence height allowed within the setback is four feet. Staff is supportive
of the proposed request. The proposed fencing is for uniformity around the
development. The proposed fence is a see through fence, which will allow for
the passage of light and air into the development. The applicant has not
indicated the development will be gated.
The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign near the northern
driveway. The applicant has indicated the proposed signage will comply with
signage allowed in multi-family zones or six feet in height and twenty-four square
feet in sign area. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage.
The applicant has indicated a single driveway location into the site with a
secondary emergency access point near the southern property line. The
northern drive has been placed to meet the minimum driveway spacing criteria.
Staff is supportive of the proposed driveway locations.
The applicant has indicated additional interior landscaping to break the sea of
asphalt in the long parking lot. The applicant has also indicated an irrigation
system will be put in place to water landscaped areas.
The applicant has indicated the thee existing billboards will remain. The site is
zoned C-3 which allows multi-family development at a density of R-5. This
typically requires a lot area per family of 1,200 square feet per dwelling unit. The
proposed development is more than adequate to meet the requirement.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The proposed development should have minimal to no
adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood if developed.
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.
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance adjacent to
Springer Boulevard.
Staff recommends approval of the requested waiver of required screening along
the southern property line.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 Master Street Plan
Name: Adoption Master Street Plan
Source: City Staff
Location: Entire Planning Area for the City of Little Rock
STAFF REPORT:
The Master Street Plan is the City of Little Rock basic transportation document.
It shows the locations of existing and proposed major roads. The purpose of the
Master Street Plan (MSP) is to assure that people, goods and services will be
able to effectively and efficiently move in, through and around the City of Little
Rock. To this end the plan delineates the locations or general location of
arterials; the roads which move traffic long distances and generally at high
volume and speed. Collectors the roads to connect the community to the arterial
network are also delineated.
The Master Street Plan goes on to define the different street types and establish
basic design standards for each type of road. The MSP includes street related
components – sidewalks, right-of-way, bike routes and utility. The proposed
location, design and make-up of the road system is the Master Street Plan.
Through the Subdivision process and to some degree the zoning process the
MSP is implemented.
The City of Little Rock has periodically done a complete review of the MSP. The
final action of this review is the adoption of a “new” MSP. This was last done in
1987. The sixteen years since the last major review is one of the largest. During
this time, the MSP added the Bike Section and moved from the Planning
Department to the Public Works Department and then back again.
Planning Staff believes with the number of amendments which have occurred
since 1987 and the aforementioned items, a complete review is desirable. This
review was done over the spring, summer and fall of 2003. The followings
changes are proposed:
1) Minor text “clean-up” changes to help readability
2) Returning the Map of Streets to a section of the MSP book rather than a
separate fold out map.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) Master Street Plan
2
3) Using the “List of Streets” to only identify streets with standards other than
those of the “base” classification.
4) To change the classification of the following streets.
a) Remove 3 proposed collectors between Lawson/Raines, Sullivan/Marsh
Roads
b) Remove Hinson Loop Road (Collector) from Hinson to Rainwood Roads
c) Add 20th Street (Collector) from Woodrow to Cedar
d) Remove Downtown Street Collectors:
Daisy Bates Main to Cumberland
Cumberland Daisy Bates to 9th Street
Scott Daisy Bates to I-630
Louisiana Daisy Bates to I-630
9th Street State to Broadway
8th Street Broadway to Main
6th Street Woodlane to Broadway
4th Street Woodlane to Cross
4th Street Louisiana to I-30
2nd Street Chester to 3rd Street viaduct
Cross 4th to 7th Streets
State 4th Street to I-630
Spring 2nd Street to I-630
e) Change Downtown Street Classifications:
Louisiana Minor Arterial to Collector 2nd Street to I-630
Main Collector to Minor Arterial 3rd Street to I-630
The Plans Committee of the Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed the
proposals during the summer and early fall of 2003. The Committee agreed or
accepted the general concepts proposed. Staff has now finalized the new MSP
for adoption by the full Commission. Notices were distributed to the “Ordinance
Amendment Contact” list at the beginning of the year (2004). Copies of the
current and “new” MSP text have been distributed for the Commission’s review.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) Master Street Plan
3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
This item was placed on Consent Agenda for deferral to March 25, 2004. By a
vote of 11 for 0 against the item was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-7570
Name: James Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
Location: 8605 Woodson Road
Applicant: Carolyn A. James
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care
Family Home to be operated in the single family
residence located on the R-2 zoned property at
8605 Woodson Road.
STAFF UPDATE:
On January 6, 2004, the Board of Directors directed staff to put a hold on all day
care family home applications, and begin a review of the Zoning Ordinance
Standards related to day care family homes, to determine if any ordinance
amendments are needed. The Planning Staff and Plans Committee have
reviewed the ordinance, and proposed amendments are on the February 12,
2004 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Staff anticipates the
ordinance amendments being presented to the Board of Directors on March 16,
2004. Therefore, staff requests that this application be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Planning Commission Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application, along with the other day care
family home – special use permits on this agenda, needed to be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Planning Commission agenda pending completion of the review
of Ordinance regulations regarding day care family homes and special use
permits.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-7571
Name: Moore Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
Location: 4024 Apple Avenue
Applicant: Margaret Moore
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care
Family Home to be operated in the single family
residence located on the AF zoned property at
4024 Apple Avenue.
STAFF UPDATE:
On January 6, 2004, the Board of Directors directed staff to put a hold on all day
care family home applications, and begin a review of the Zoning Ordinance
Standards related to day care family homes, to determine if any ordinance
amendments are needed. The Planning Staff and Plans Committee have
reviewed the ordinance, and proposed amendments are on the February 12,
2004 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Staff anticipates the
ordinance amendments being presented to the Board of Directors on March 16,
2004. Therefore, staff requests that this application be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Planning Commission Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application, along with the other day care
family home – special use permits on this agenda, needed to be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Planning Commission agenda pending completion of the review
of Ordinance regulations regarding day care family homes and special use
permits.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-7572
Name: Parks Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
Location: 2913 Ware Street
Applicant: Teresa Parks
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care
Family Home to be operated in the single family
residence located on the R-2 zoned property at
2913 Ware Street.
STAFF UPDATE:
On January 6, 2004, the Board of Directors directed staff to put a hold on all day
care family home applications, and begin a review of the Zoning Ordinance
Standards related to day care family homes, to determine if any ordinance
amendments are needed. The Planning Staff and Plans Committee have
reviewed the ordinance, and proposed amendments are on the February 12,
2004 Planning Commission agenda for discussion. Staff anticipates the
ordinance amendments being presented to the Board of Directors on March 16,
2004. Therefore, staff requests that this application be deferred to the March 25,
2004 Planning Commission Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application, along with the other day care
family home – special use permits on this agenda, needed to be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Planning Commission agenda pending completion of the review
of Ordinance regulations regarding day care family homes and special use
permits.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 25, 2004 agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was deferred.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-4116-A
Owner: ECCO Development Corporation
Applicant: Eugene Eberle, Jr.
Location: 8300 Kellett Road
Area: Approximately 16 acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to PD-I
(ECCO Development Corp. – Long-Form PD-I)
Purpose: Welding business and I-2 permitted uses
Existing Use: Vacant industrial buildings
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Arkansas River and undeveloped property; zoned I-2
East – Fourche Creek and undeveloped property; zoned R-2
South – Single family residences on large lots and a church, zoned R-2
West – Undeveloped property and Little Rock Municipal Airport;
zoned R-2 and I-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Any construction, fill, grading, or land clearing activities will require a
special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas per Sec. 8-283 prior to
construction. An updated survey showing all current floodway and
floodplain locations, along with all existing easement would be
required.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. Bus Route #20 (College
Station Route) runs along East Roosevelt Road to the south.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4116-A
2
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the East Roosevelt and Hermitage
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Port Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Light Industrial for this property. The applicant has applied for PD-I
zoning for the continued industrial use of the property.
The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan,
which would necessitate a Plan 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.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
ECCO Development Corporation, owner of approximately 16 acres of
property at 8300 Kellett Road, is requesting to rezone the property from
“R-2” Single Family District to “PD-I” Planned Development – Industrial.
The rezoning is requested for use of the property by a welding company,
with “I-2” Light Industrial permitted uses as alternate uses. The applicant
originally filed a rezoning application for a change from R-2 to “I-3”
Industrial District, but after reviewing the application staff determined a
PD-I zoning would be more appropriate, given the existing R-2 zoning and
uses to the south.
The 16 acre property contains four (4) industrial buildings which have
existed on the site for many years. There is a levee which runs east/west
through the center of the property, with one (1) of the buildings being
located between the levee and the Arkansas River (back water). There is
an access drive (mostly gravel) which runs from the end of Kellett Road to
a barge dock located along the north property line. The majority of the
property is grass covered.
The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. There is
undeveloped R-2 and I-2 zoned property located to the north, east and
west, with the Little Rock Municipal Airport located further to the west.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4116-A
3
There is R-2 zoned property to the south which contains single family
residences on large lots and a church. The Southwest Airlines Call
Center building and the UPS development are located further to the south
along Fourche Dam Pike. Fourche Creek borders the property to the
east, with back water from the Arkansas River being located adjacent to
the north property line. The back water area has served as river barge
access to the property for a number of years.
The applicant proposes to operate a welding business on the property,
which will utilize the property basically as is. The applicant proposes to
remodel the three (3) largest buildings on the property for offices and
warehouse space. The smaller building on the south side of the access
drive will likely be removed, given its deteriorated state. The existing drive
and parking will also be utilized, with possible minor updates. The
applicant also proposes to have an area of outside storage/outside
welding located between the levee and the river. This is an area where
outside welding/metal work has taken place in the past. A business which
once occupied the property cut very large metal structures, which were
parts of dismantled missile silos, into small pieces. As noted previously,
the applicant proposes I-2 permitted uses as alternate uses.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Light
Industrial. The requested PD-I zoning does not require a change to the
Land Use Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested PD-I zoning. As noted previously, the
applicant originally requested a rezoning to I-3, but amended the
application at the request of staff. Staff felt that there were several
onerous uses (bulk storage of flammable materials, salvage yard, landfill,
etc.) permitted in the I-3 zoning district, which would not be appropriate for
the property, given its close proximity to single family uses to the south.
The applicant proposes to use the property as it has been used under a
nonconforming zoning status for a number of years. With the conditions
placed on the property through the PD-I zoning (site plan and use
specific), staff feels that the rezoning will have no adverse impact on the
general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested PD-I zoning, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The outdoor use of the property will be limited to the proposed
welding business only. Any outdoor use/storage associated with a
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4116-A
4
subsequent user of the property must conform to the I-2 zoning
development criteria, or a revised PD-I must be filed.
2. All outdoor uses will be limited to daylight hours.
3. All outdoor uses will be limited to the area of the property between
the existing levee and the river.
4. Any signage must conform to the industrial standards, as allowed
by the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
5. Any area of the property located within the regulatory floodway
must be zoned OS.
6. Building permits must be obtained for remodeling the existing
structures.
7. Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away from adjacent
residential property.
8. Permitted uses will include the proposed welding business and
those uses listed as “permitted uses” in the “I-2” Light Industrial
Zoning District.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
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 Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was approved.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-4336-R
Owner: Immanuel Baptist Church and Arkansas
Children’s Hospital
Applicant: McClelland Consulting Engineers
Location: 1000 Bishop Street; at the intersection of West
10th and Bishop Streets
Area: Approximately 7.75 acres
Request: Rezone from R-4, O-3, C-3 and I-2 to O-2
Purpose: Arkansas Children’s Hospital related clinics
and offices
Existing Use: Church, offices and parking
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Arkansas Children’s Hospital campus and various office uses;
zoned O-2 and C-3
South – Arkansas Children’s Hospital campus and various office uses;
zoned O-2 and C-3
East – Martin Luther King, Jr. Elementary School and various office and
commercial uses along MLK Drive; zoned R-4, C-3 and I-2
West – Arkansas Children’s Hospital campus; zoned O-2 and O-3
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Any future site re-development will be subject to compliance with the
Boundary Street Ordinance.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The property is located on CATA Bus Route #11 (M. L. King, Jr. Route).
Bus Route #3 (Baptist Med Center Route) is located to the west and Bus
Route #9 (UALR Route) is located to the south along West 14th Street.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-R
2
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the Downtown and Central High
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use
Plan shows Public Institutional for this property. The applicant has
applied for O-2 Office and Institutional for hospital related facilities.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
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:
Immanuel Baptist Church and Arkansas Children’s Hospital, owners of a
collective 7.75 acres of property at the intersection of West 10th and
Bishop Streets, are requesting to rezone the property from R-4, O-3, C-3
and I-2 to “O-2” Office and Institutional District. The rezoning is proposed
in order to incorporate properties into the Arkansas Children’s Hospital
campus. The applicant has noted that the Immanuel Baptist Church
structures will be renovated and used as hospital offices and clinics.
The Immanuel Baptist Church buildings are located on the two (2) blocks
bounded by West 10th Street, West 11th Street, M.L.K., Jr. Drive and
Marshall Street, as well as the building located at the northeast corner of
West 10th and Bishop Streets. The one (1) story building at the southeast
corner of Marshall Street and Maryland Avenue is occupied by Children’s
Hospital financial offices. The remainder of the property proposed for
rezoning contains paved parking areas.
The surrounding properties to the north, south and west include a mixture
of office and commercial uses. Most of these properties are owned by
Arkansas Children’s Hospital and are occupied by their facilities. The
properties to the east and south along M. L. King, Jr. Drive contain the
M.L. King, Jr. Elementary School and various office and commercial uses.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-R
3
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates all of the property, except a
small piece (one lot) at the southeast corner of West 11th and Bishop
Streets, as Public Institutional. The lot at the southeast corner of West
11th and Bishop Streets is shown as Mixed Office Commercial. The
requested O-2 zoning does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested O-2 zoning. Staff feels that O-2
zoning for this property is appropriate for the general area. All of the
property proposed for rezoning was included within the boundary of the
Arkansas Children’s Hospital Campus Master Plan which was presented
to the Planning Commission in 1999. Revisions to that Master Plan have
been in the works, and are scheduled to be unveiled by Children’s
Hospital on February 6, 2004. The revised master plan should provide
more detailed information regarding the planned future use of the property
to be rezoned. The O-2 zoning district is a site plan review district, and
any future development or redevelopment of the property will require
Planning Commission review and approval. Staff feels that the proposed
rezoning will have no adverse impact on the general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested O-2 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
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 Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The
application was approved.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-7544-A
NAME: Little Angels Day Care Center –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 4005 West 10th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Pamela Hardin/Clarese Adams
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow use of
the residential structure on this R-4 zoned property as
a day care center for 10 children with 3 employees.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of West 10th Street, between
S. Cedar and S. Elm Streets.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within a residential block that is part of a
neighborhood that is “sandwiched” between I-630 and the 12th Street
commercial corridor. The properties immediately around this site are
zoned R-3 and R-4 and are occupied by single family and two family
residences. Several of the residential structures in the area are vacant
and have been boarded. Several new single family residences have been
constructed along West 11th Street, behind this property. There are
nonresidential uses in the immediate vicinity including a large church and
a county health facility to the northeast, a grocery store to the southwest
and a partially developed PCD (office building) to the north. Efforts have
been made to not only preserve the existing residential structures in the
area but to increase the housing stock by constructing new homes. Staff
is concerned that allowing this additional, nonresidential use could
hamper the efforts to revitalize the residential neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Forest Hills, Pine to
Woodrow, Stephens Area Faith and Hope Neighborhood Associations
were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A day care center for 10 children with 3 employees requires 4 on-site
parking spaces. The site has a single-wide, concrete driveway that is
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7544-A
2
deep enough to accommodate three vehicles stacked end-to-end. The
proposed parking arrangement does not comply with Ordinance Design
Standards.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
A 6-foot high opaque wooden fence with its face side directed outward is
required to screen this property from the residential properties to the east,
west and south. If the backyard is to be developed as a parking area,
then a minimum 6-foot 9-inch wide landscape buffer strip and associated
plantings will be required around its perimeter.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. The proposed land use places a commercial use on 10th Street, which
is currently classified as a local street used for residential purposes.
The plan appears to propose curb-side drop-off and pick-up of
children, rather than on-site parking.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: No Comments received.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments received.
CATA: A CATA Bus Route is located on West 12th Street, 2 blocks to the
South.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7544-A
3
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JANUARY 15, 2004)
The applicant, Clarese Adams, was present. Staff presented the item and noted
that the site did not have the required 4 on-site parking spaces. Additional
information was requested on proposed signage and fencing. Public Works and
Landscape Comments were noted.
Ms. Adams responded that a new chain-link fence had been installed around the
back yard. She stated she would request a variance from the requirement to
install screening of the playground and existing parking area. Ms. Adams stated
the 3 employees would not be at the site at the same time, so all of the required
parking would not be needed.
Ms. Adams was advised to respond to staff issues by January 21, 2004. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A conditional use permit is requested to allow a day care center to be located on
the R-4 zoned property at 4005 West 10th Street. There will be no residential
occupancy of the property. This 46’ X 130’ lot is occupied by a 1,350± square
foot, one-story, frame residential structure. A single-wide, concrete driveway is
located along the east perimeter of the site. The rear yard is enclosed with a
4-foot tall, chain-link fence. The site is no longer covered by a valid of Bill of
Assurance.
The applicant proposes to operate a day care center with an enrollment of 10
children, with 3 employees. The applicant has already received her state
license. The 3 employees will work in shifts and will not all be at the site at the
same time. Hours of operation are proposed to be Monday through Friday,
6:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. A 3’ X 5’ ground-mounted sign is proposed.
Playground equipment will be placed in the fenced rear yard. Other than the
proposed sign, there will be no changes to the property.
While there are similarities to the applicant’s proposal and a “day care family
home” in that it is to be conducted in a residence and enrollment will not exceed
10 children, there is one crucial difference that is of concern to staff. The
property will not be occupied as a residence. The sole use of the site will be as a
day care center. Additionally, the applicant proposes the placement of a sign
and to operate with up to 3 employees. As was noted in the “compatibility”
section above, this property is located in a fragile residential neighborhood.
Efforts have been made to increase the viability of the neighborhood, including
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7544-A
4
construction of new single-family residences by CDBG and the Black Community
Developers. Staff believes that allowing this non-residential use could hamper
those efforts and could have a detrimental effect on the neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of denial.
The applicant, Clarese Adams, addressed the Commission and stated she had
lived in the neighborhood 27-28 years. She read two letters of support from area
residents. Ms. Adams stated hers was a small day care that also served as a
“safe haven” for children walking to and from the bus stop.
Commissioner Meyer asked Ms. Adams why she had not considered locating,
in one of the vacant commercial buildings located along West 12th Street.
Ms. Adams responded that the lower cost of renting the house allowed her to
keep the cost to her clients down. Commissioner Meyer responded that there
might be a commercial building in the area that had a comparable rent.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, stated that the League supported
day care family homes but not this proposed commercial use in a residential
neighborhood.
Commissioner Allen stated he had always been a strong proponent of home –
based day care. He stated the Commission had denied other businesses in
residential areas because there was no residential occupancy associated with
them. He stated the Commission needed to be consistent.
Commissioner Floyd stated this was a transitional neighborhood; more of a
residential island in a commercial/office neighborhood. He stated day care was
a needed service in the area.
In response to a question from Commissioner Williams, Dana Carney of the
Planning Staff stated there was no neighborhood opposition to the application.
Commissioner Rector stated he agreed with Commissioner Floyd. He stated he
had lived near a larger day care and found it to be a needed service in the
neighborhood.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7544-A
5
Commissioner Lowry stated he believed strongly in having the applicant live in
the house when a day care is proposed in a residence. He asked if the approval
could be limited to this applicant only.
Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson responded that the Commission could make
that a condition of approval.
In response to a question from the Commission, Ms. Adams stated she was
amending her application to be only for her operation of the day care.
Commissioner Allen asked Ms. Adams if she would reduce the number of
children to 6. In the ensuing discussion, Ms. Adams did not reduce the number
of children from 10 to 6.
Commissioner Adcock stated she had always considered day cares to be a
business.
A motion was made to approve the application as amended to be only for this
applicant’s operation of the day care. The motion was approved by a vote of
6 ayes, 5 noes and 0 absent.
At staff’s request, the Commission clarified that the approval included variances
from the screening requirement and the parking requirement.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-7565
NAME: Little Rock Compassion Center –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 3618 West Roosevelt Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: William Holloway/Kevin O’Dwyer
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow use
of the former Salvation Army facility located at
3618 West Roosevelt Road as a homeless shelter
with associated activities. The property is zoned
I-2 and C-3.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the north side of West Roosevelt Road, at
Maple Street; just east of the Asher Avenue/West Roosevelt intersection.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in an area of mixed uses and zoning. There are
several institutional uses in the immediate area including a large,
multibuilding, state complex; a nursing home; a LRSD Facility (not a
school); and a church. The property was developed as and served as a
homeless shelter, training center, church and thrift store; the uses
proposed by the applicant. Staff believes this is an appropriate location
for the proposed use.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Goodwill, Love, Midway
and Stephens Area Faith Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site is occupied by a multistory, 49,000± square foot building with a
detached, 2,400± square foot building. The site has a 50± space parking
lot located west of Maple Street and an asphalt paved parking area
behind the main building. No changes are proposed to the site. The
existing parking should be sufficient for the proposed use.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7565
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Since this is an existing development with no changes proposed, no
landscaping upgrade or screening is required.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. No comments on use change for existing facilities.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Existing service main on property. No permanent
construction within 5 feet either side of existing sewer main.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: No Comments received.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments received.
CATA: A CATA Bus Route is located on Roosevelt Road.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JANUARY 15, 2004)
Kevin O’Dwyer and Stuart Mackey were present representing the applicant.
Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed on the
proposed operation; including numbers of persons to be housed, signage,
employees, thrift store, operating the donation center and recovery and
education programs. Staff asked if a church would be located in the building. It
was noted that there were no landscape or Public Works Comments since no
changes were being proposed to the existing facility and parking lot.
The applicants stated they would reply to staff questions by January 21, 2004, as
requested by staff. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7565
3
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to use the former Salvation Army facility located at 3618
Roosevelt Road as a homeless shelter and related facilities. The site consists of
two tracts: a 2.01 acre, I-2 zoned tract on the east side of Maple Street that
contains the 49,000 square foot building; and a 0.77 acre, C-3 zoned tract on the
west side of Maple Street that contains a 50± space, paved parking lot. Portions
of the site are fenced. The site has two ground-mounted signs; one in front of
the main building and one in front of the parking lot. The applicant proposes no
changes to the site. Panels on the signs will be changed to reflect the new
name.
The Little Rock Compassion Center intends to use the building to provide a night
time shelter for the homeless as well as a day shelter. Space is available for
rooms to shelter complete families for the night when needed. Capacity is
proposed as 200 individuals and 5 families. The Center plans on having a drug
and alcohol recovery program, educational services for obtaining a G.E.D. and
job skill classes. Three meals a day will be provided, 7 days a week.
Transportation will be provided to and from labor offices to encourage the
able-bodied to find a job. A food pantry will also be provided to help the
working poor.
The thrift store will be reopened which will not only bring in revenue, but will
offer an opportunity to those on recovery or in educational classes to get hands-
on training in the retail area. The thrift store will operate from 9:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
The Center will initially employ ten persons, but that will likely expand as needed.
Security will be provided to provide 24 hour watch over the building and grounds.
The Operations Director will supervise all staff and volunteer workers. The
Men’s Director will supervise transients and activities. The CEO will oversee all
directors and staff. Security will insist that any persons loitering outside either go
inside the Compassion Center or leave the premises. The proposed recovery
and educational services will be conducted day and night as needed. Sundays
will be for church services. The facility has an existing chapel that will be used
for the church services.
The donation center at the rear of the property will be reopened and will operate
from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Security will monitor this
area to ensure that all drop-offs are made properly and will report any trash
dropped off to maintenance on a daily basis.
Staff is supportive of the proposed use. This building was built for and served as
a Salvation Army homeless shelter. The proposed use is an appropriate use for
the site.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7565
4
On January 21, 2004, the applicant submitted responses to questions raised at
Subdivision Committee and reflected in the analysis above. There is no valid Bill
of Assurance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the application subject to the following condition:
1. The donation drop-off area is to be kept clean. There is to be no outside
storage of materials.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
condition 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 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-7573
NAME: The Furniture Club Warehouse –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 6805 West 12th Street, Suite “D”
OWNER/APPLICANT: Danny Thomas Properties/Doug Berryhill
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a retail
furniture store to be operated in one lease space of
this I-2 zoned, multibuilding site.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of West 12th Street, one lot east
of Westpark Drive. The lease space in question is located in the second
building south of the street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within a large, office warehouse park. The
buildings surrounding this site contain a variety of office, office warehouse
and commercial uses. Beyond the office park, the area contains a variety
of uses and zonings including a cemetery, a city park, a residential
neighborhood, the Centers for Youth and Families and additional
commercial and industrial uses. Allowing this retail furniture store in one
lease space will have no effect on the surrounding neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Leander and University
Park Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A 5,000 square foot retail use normally requires 16 on-site parking
spaces. The nature of this use is such that the parking requirement is
much lower. There is substantial parking available around the 3 buildings
that comprise this development. Several of the lease spaces appear to
be occupied by warehouse uses that have a low parking requirement.
There is more than sufficient parking available to accommodate the
proposed use.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7573
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Since this is an existing development with no changes proposed, no
landscaping upgrade or screening is required.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. 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: Approved as submitted.
Water: No Comments received.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: A CATA Bus Route is located on West 12th Street.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JANUARY 15, 2004)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding days and hours of operation, number of
employees and signage. The applicant responded the business would be open
Thursday through Saturday, 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Sunday, 1:00 p.m. to
4:00 p.m. He stated there would be two employees and signage would consist
only of a wall sign and a panel on the complex tenant sign.
The Committee determined there were no issues and forwarded the item to the
full Commission.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7573
3
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The I-2 zoned property at 6805 West 12th Street is occupied by a one-story,
30,000 square foot, office warehouse building. The building is one of three that
comprise the overall development. The applicant proposes to operate a retail
furniture store in one, 5,000 square foot lease area of the building. The retail
use requires a conditional use permit in I-2. No changes are proposed to the
site. The furniture store will operate Thursday through Saturday, 11:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. and Sunday, 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. There will be two employees.
Signage will consist of a wall mounted sign that complies with ordinance
standards and a space on the complex tenant sign that fronts onto West 12th
Street. There is no bill of assurance issue.
Staff is supportive of the proposal. The building is one of many that jointly form a
large, office warehouse park. There are several other non-warehouse uses in
the complex; including a restaurant, offices and other retail uses. There is
sufficient parking to accommodate this use. Allowing the retail furniture store in
one lease area will have no effect on the surrounding neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
there being no storage of furniture, mattresses or packing materials outside of
the building.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the
Commission that the applicant had failed to properly complete the notification
requirement and the item needed to be deferred. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
March 11, 2004 commission meeting. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and
0 absent.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10
SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance Amendments regarding Special
Use Permits and Day Care Family Homes
REQUEST: That the Planning Commission receive comments
from interested parties and the Plans Committee and
adopt the proposed ordinance amendments.
STAFF REPORT:
At the direction of the Board of Directors, staff initiated a review of the ordinance
criteria for Special Use Permits in general and day care family homes in
particular. All special use permit applications for day care family homes pending
action by the Planning Commission or Board of Directors have been put on hold
until this amendment process is completed.
Staff prepared a draft of suggested changes which were presented at the
January 21, 2004 Plans Committee meeting. Troy Laha, of SWLR United for
Progress, presented a list of additional proposed changes. During the
discussion, the Committee made one change to the staff proposal and added
several of Mr. Laha’s suggested changes.
The proposed ordinance amendments now include the following:
1. Additional development criteria for day care family homes as follow:
(a) The day care family home must be located in a single family home
which is the full time residence of the caregiver.
(b) No Special Use Permits will be approved for day care family
homes proposed to be located within 300 feet of an operating day
care family home for which a Special Use Permit has previously
been issued.
(c) A City of Little Rock privilege license must be obtained for the day
care family home.
(d) A copy of the day care family home’s current State of Arkansas
license must be sent to the City Collector’s Office each year when
the annual privilege license is renewed.
(e) All vehicles shall be parked on a paved surface.
(f) All vehicles located on the site shall be operational.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.)
2
(g) All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the driveway and
not on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the
Commission.
(h) Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed
by staff every three years for compliance with the development
criteria and Planning Commission approval.
2. A revocation procedure for any use approved as a Special Use Permit
whereby review and possible action by the Planning Commission may be
initiated by staff or upon receipt by staff of a petition signed by the residents
of no less than twenty-five percent of the properties located within 200 feet of
the property for which a special use permit has been approved.
A final draft of the proposed amendments was presented to the Plans
Committee at its February 4, 2004 meeting. The Plans Committee report will be
presented to the full Commission. A copy of the draft was sent to the Ordinance
Amendment contact list of persons and organizations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance changes.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 12, 2004)
Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, presented the item and noted there were
three changes that came out of the February 4, 2004 Plans Committee meeting.
The changes were as follow:
1. One additional development criterion for day care family homes as follows:
The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed day
care family home.
2. One additional development criterion for family care facilities as follows:
The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed family
care facility.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.)
3
3. Addition of one sentence to the revocation procedure as follows:
For the purposes of this subsection, the distance between properties shall be
measured in a straight line without regard to intervening structures or objects,
from property line to property line.
Mr. Carney then explained the proposed changes one-by-one and stated staff
felt the changes would address the majority of concerns that had been raised.
He also presented a copy of other changes proposed by Troy Laha and
members of SWLR United for Progress.
In response to questions from the Commission, Mr. Carney responded that
existing day care family homes would be nonconforming but that the 3-year staff
inspection and revocation procedure would apply. He stated the Commission
could grant variances from any of the proposed development criteria at the time
a special use permit was being reviewed. Mr. Carney stated that, although some
of the provisions are covered elsewhere in the city code, placing then in the
Zoning Ordinance as well gives staff and the Commission another tool to use
when dealing with Special Use Permits and day care family homes.
Troy Laha addressed the Commission and stated day care family homes were
businesses. He stated the typical neighborhood action plan recommended that
businesses be located on collector and arterial streets, not within the
neighborhood. Mr. Laha stated the spacing requirement was not sufficient and
gave examples of several long streets that could have multiple day care family
homes based on a 300 feet separation requirement. He stated people who work
at night and sleep during the day are disturbed by the noise of children playing.
Shelly Magee, address unknown, stated the playground area and the noise
associated with the playground was not addressed in the proposed amendment.
She stated the ongoing noise would be disturbing to neighbors. Ms. Magee
stated DHS requires 75 square feet of playground area for each child and she
was recommending a minimum playground area of 5,000 square feet with a
setback of 25 feet on all sides and 75 feet of setback from the nearest residence.
Jan Taylor, address unknown, stated she was glad to see the proposed
amendments. She recommended that each day care family home be required to
provide two, on-site, paved parking places. She asked if there was not some
mechanism for one person to begin the revocation procedure. Mr. Carney
responded that the actions of one neighbor, could influence staff to initiate the
revocation procedure. Ms. Taylor asked if a written statement from DHS
outlining a violation would be sufficient to initiate the process. Mr. Carney
responded that staff had to have some evidence of a violation, not just hearsay.
He stated a statement from DHS would not be considered hearsay.
February 12, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.)
4
Pam Noble, of 5505 Rinke Road, asked that a sidewalk from the house to the
street be required in those instances where on-site parking is waived by the
Commission. She stated the playground noise would be an invasion of privacy
for persons who live in the neighborhood.
Troy Laha read a letter from Viola Belton in which she stated day care family
homes have a definite impact on property values.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, stated there was a need for home-
based day care. She stated the League was supportive of the changes
proposed by staff. Ms. Bell warned that, if the rules are made too onerous, they
may create an insurmountable barrier for people to obtain approval for day care
family homes.
Commissioner Lowry asked Ms. Bell what the League’s position was on the
noise issue, “less and except gagging the kids.” Ms. Bell responded that you
have a noise level in any neighborhood that has children. She stated she felt the
level of noise that is typical in a neighborhood, including children playing, is
appropriate.
Pat Gee, president of the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association, asked
if the neighborhood association could initiate the revocation procedure.
Mr. Carney responded that an association’s involvement could cause staff to
initiate the revocation procedure.
There was then a discussion of the 25% number of residents outlined in the
revocation procedure. Commissioner Floyd stated the issue had been discussed
in Plans Committee and the Committee felt the number to be reasonable.
Troy Laha stated he had the utmost confidence in staff but he still had concerns
about the noise created by children playing outside.
Commissioner Floyd asked Mr. Laha if he would rather have the regulations as
they currently exist or as proposed by staff. Mr. Laha suggested that staff’s
proposal should be “tweaked” to include a requirement that day care family
homes be located on collector or arterial streets.
Chairman Rahman stated he lived ½ block from a major church and day care.
He stated the noise was loud but he felt the day care added to the neighborhood.
He stated he thought it was appropriate to allow day cares in neighborhoods.
A motion was made to approve the ordinance amendments proposed by staff.
The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.