pc_05 06 2004
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
MAY 6, 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
Gary Langlais
Norm Floyd
Mizan Rahman
Jerry Meyer
Fred Allen, Jr.
Darrin Williams
Bill Rector
Bob Lowry
Robert Stebbins
Chauncey Taylor
Members Absent: None
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the March 25, 2004 and April 8, 2004 Meetings
of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as
presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
MAY 6, 2004
4:00 P.M.
I. DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Z-7570 James Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
6805 Woodson Road
B. LU04-18-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District from Mixed Office Commercial and Park/Open Space to
Commercial for the west side of Kanis Road approximately 600 feet
south of Kanis.
C. Z-7435-A Rezoning from PCD to C-3
West side of Kanis Road, 600 feet south of Chenal Parkway
D. Z-7593 Rezoning from O-3 to O-2
West side of S. Shackleford Road, approximately 400 feet south
of Hermitage Road
E. Z-7593-A Sleep Inn – Conditional Use Permit
800 Block of S. Shackleford Road
F. LU04-11-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the I-430 Planning District from
Single Family to Suburban Office for an area on the east side of
Aldersgate Road south of 18th Street.
G. Z-7595 Rezoning from R-2 to O-1
Southeast corner of West 18th Street and Aldersgate Road
H. Z-7596 Rezoning from I-2 to C-3
5201 Asher Avenue
I. Z-7482-A Geyer Springs Church of Christ – Revised Conditional Use Permit
6004 West 53rd Street
J. Z-7586 Adams Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit
9009 Woodford Drive
K. Z-7592 Liberty House Correctional Facility – Conditional Use Permit
1815 West Roosevelt Road
Agenda, Page Two
I. DEFERRED ITEMS: (Cont.)
L. Z-5600-C Chenal Mini-Storage – Revised Conditional Use Permit
24300 Chenal Parkway
M. Z-7594 Vasquez Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
6720 Mabelvale Cut-Off
N. Z-7585 The River Tower Long-Form PD-R, located on the northeast corner
of River Bend and Riverfront Drive
O. Z-6554-B Bowman Kanis Retail Center - Revised Long-Form PCD, located
on the northeast corner of Kanis Road and Bowman Road
II. NEW ITEMS:
1. S-643-B Whispering Pines Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located on Castle
Valley Road approximately 1,500 feet west of Chicot Road.
2. Z-7618 Dickerson Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
6 Rosemoor Drive
3. Z-7619 Watkins Day Care Family Home – Special Use Permit
7716 Burnelle Drive
4. Z-7620 Bubar Family Care Facility – Special Use Permit
3712 High Drive
5. Z-7621 Rezoning from R-2 to O-3
2203/2225 Barrow Road
6. Z-7622 Rezoning from R-2 to C-3
15617 Chenal Parkway
7. LU04-19-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District on
the southeast and southwest corners of Chalmont and Cantrell
Road from Single Family to Commercial.
7.1. Z-7623 Rezoning from R-2 to C-3
Southeast and Southwest corners of Cantrell Road and
Chalamont Drive
Agenda, Page Three
II. NEW ITEMS: (CONT.)
8. LU04-22-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the West Fourche Planning
District on southwest corner of Marsh Road and Colonel Glenn
Road from Single Family to Office.
8.1. Z-7624 Rezoning from R-2 to O-3
Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and Marsh Road
9. LU04-11-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the I-430 Planning District on the
north side of West 36th Street west of I-430 from Mixed Use to
Commercial.
9.1. Z-7625 Rezoning from R-2 to O-3
11524 West 36th Street
10. Z-2722-B Martinez Grocery Wholesale – Conditional Use Permit
6500 S. University Avenue
11. Z-3371-J Trane Warehouse – Conditional Use Permit
Commercial Center Drive at Health Care Blvd.
12. Z-3442-J Wal-Mart - Revised Conditional Use Permit
8801 Baseline Road
13. Z-4384-D Curves for Women – Conditional Use Permit
13420 Otter Creek Parkway, Suites 5 and 6
14. Z-4670-A Second Presbyterian Church – Revised Conditional Use Permit
600 Pleasant Valley Drive
15. Z-5365-E Geyer Springs First Baptist Church – Revised Conditional
Use Permit
12400 I-30
16. Z-7617 Dodds Duplex – Conditional Use Permit
2119 West 17th Street
17. Z-7626 Joe T. Robinson School – Conditional Use Permit
21,501 Cantrell Road
18. Z-7627 Woodlands Edge Subdivision Recreational Facility
Woodlands Trail Drive
19. Z-7628 Westover Hills Presbyterian Church – Conditional Use Permit
6400 Kavanaugh Blvd.
Agenda, Page Four
II. NEW ITEMS: (CONT.)
20. Z-7629 Cruse Uniform and Equipment – Conditional Use Permit
1001 John Barrow Road
21. Z-7630 Neale Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
43 Nob View Circle
22. Z-7631 Graham Temple C.O.G.I.C. Family Life Center –
Conditional Use Permit
4307 Frazier Pike
23. G-25-189 Collins Street Name Change to Mahlon Martin Street
24. G-25-190 20th Street Name Change to Charles Bussey Avenue
25. Proposed Amendment to Section 36-54 of Chapter 36 of the Code of
Ordinances regarding day care family homes
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: A 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.
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 Wakefield and SWLR United for
Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
Staff Analysis:
6805 Woodson Road is located at the southeast corner of Woodson Road and
Newstead Drive. All surrounding properties are zoned R-2 and contain single
family residences. There is a mixture of commercial and industrial uses to the
north, along West 65th Street.
The applicant’s home is a one-story brick and frame structure and is typical of
those in the general area. The front yard is fenced and provides a safe play
area. The applicant proposes to operate the day care from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m., Monday through Saturday. The applicant has noted that she will have one
(1) employee, as required by the State Department of Human Services.
There is a one-car concrete driveway from Woodson Road, with parking for three
(3) vehicles, including a single-car carport. On inspection, staff observed four (4)
vehicles parked in the rear yard on unpaved surface. The applicant informed
staff that some of the vehicles will be removed from the property. The applicant
has discussed constructing a concrete parking pad on the south side of the
driveway and carport. There should be sufficient space for drop-off and pick-up
of children.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7570
2
The applicant is currently licensed by the State to care for five (5) children. She
is in the process of being licensed to keep up to 10. The applicant has noted
that the majority of the children she cares for live in southwest Little Rock
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 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.
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, as long as the applicant ceases parking vehicles on the grass in the
rear yard. Staff feels that the proposed day care family home at this location will
have no adverse impact on the general area. There are no permitted/licensed
day care family homes or day care centers within 300 feet of the site.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care family
home at 6805 Woodson Road, subject to the following conditions:
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7570
3
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section 36-
54(e)(3).
2. Compliance with the following additional site and location criteria as
approved by the Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the
Board of Directors on March 16, 2004:
a. This use may be located only in a single-family home, occupied by
the caregiver and which is the full time residence of the caregiver.
b. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will
be approved for a day care family home proposed to be located within
300 feet of an operating day care family home for which a Special
Use Permit has previously been approved. 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.
c. All day care family homes located in the City of Little Rock are
required to obtain a City of Little Rock business license and to pay an
annual business tax as specified in Chapter 17. of the Code.
d. A copy of the day care family home’s current State of Arkansas
license must be submitted to the City Collector’s Office each year at
the time of payment of the annual business tax.
e. All vehicles must be parked on a paved surface.
f. All vehicles located on the site must be operational.
g. All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the property’s driveway
and not on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the
Planning Commission.
h. Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed by
staff every three (3) years for compliance with the development
criteria and Planning Commission approval.
i. The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed
day care family home.
3. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
4. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to day-light
hours.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7570
4
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.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the May 6, 2004 agenda. Staff supported the
deferral request.
With a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent, the Commission voted to waive
their bylaws and accept the applicant’s request for deferral, 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 May 6, 2004 agenda. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The
application was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the July 29, 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 July 29, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: LU04-18-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District
Location: West side of Kanis Road south of Chenal Parkway
Request: Mixed Office Commercial and Park / Open Space to Commercial
Source: Joe White, White - Daters & Associates
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
This request is a Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District from Mixed Office Commercial and Park / Open Space to Commercial.
The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of
products, personal and professional services, and general business activities.
Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that
they serve. The applicant wishes to develop the property for general commercial
uses.
Staff is not expanding the application since the property along Kanis Road north
of Rock Creek is already available for retail development.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is a house currently zoned Planned Commercial Development and
is 1.04 acres ± in size. The property to the west and north is a Planned
Commercial Development for a Shopping Center. The property to the northeast
is vacant land zoned C-3 General Commercial on the southeast corner of Chenal
Parkway and Kanis Road. The property across the street to the east is a PCD for
a big box retail development with a lumberyard in the back of the property. The
vacant land to the south is zoned R-2.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On January 20, 2004 a change was made from Office to Mixed Use on Rahling
Road and Champlin Road about 1 mile north of the property in question to
accommodate proposed development.
On June 17, 2003 multiple changes were made from Single Family and Office to
Multifamily and Low Density Residential on the south side of Rahling Road north
of Chenal Parkway within a 1 mile radius to the north of the study area to
accommodate proposed development.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-18-02
2
On July 3, 2001, a change was made from Low Density Residential, Mixed Office
Commercial, and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family in an area
bounded by Bowman Road, Panther Creek, Cooper Orbit Road, and Brodie
Creek starting about 1 mile southeast of the applicant’s property to recognize
existing conditions.
On April 17, 2001 multiple changes were made from Single Family, Multifamily,
and Park / Open Space to Community Shopping on Chenal Parkway at Rahling
Road starting about 1 mile northwest of the amendment area to accommodate
proposed development.
The applicant’s property is shown as Mixed Office Commercial and Park / Open
Space on the Future Land Use plan. The land to the west and north is also
shown as Mixed Office Commercial. The land across the street to the east is
shown as Commercial. To the south, the land within the 100 year flood plain of
Rock Creek is shown as Park / Open Space, while the land south of the creek is
shown as Single Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Kanis Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Collector and is built as a
rural two-lane road and will be subject to half street improvements. To the
southeast, the Master Street Plan shows a Proposed Minor Arterial, which will
reroute Kanis Road to intersect with Chenal Parkway at Wellington Hills Road. A
Class I Bikeway is shown along Chenal Parkway but will not be affected by this
amendment.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 show a Potential
Greenbelt along the flood plain of Rock Creek. Development of the study area
will need to respect the integrity of the drainage system located in the 100-year
flood plain of the creek as well as the integrity of the Potential Greenbelt shown
in the plan.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-18-02
3
ANALYSIS:
The proposed change, along with vacant areas shown as Commercial, and the
possibility of commercial development in vacant areas shown as Mixed Office
Commercial would expand the corridor of commercial development already
shown along Chenal Parkway from the intersection of Wellington Hills Road to
the western intersection of Kanis Road west of Kirk Road by adding new land to
the south along Kanis Road. The change would result in an increase of intensity
for non-residential uses located along Kanis Road south of Chenal Parkway.
Although land shown as Commercial is located across the street to the east, the
property to the east is primarily accessed and oriented towards Chenal Parkway.
This change would expand the area available for commercial development but
would eliminate the possibility for office development, which would be more in
character with current developments fronting Kanis Road.
The primary purpose of the areas shown as Park / Open Space next to the
applicant’s property is to protect the integrity of Rock Creek. The strip of PK/OS
shown along the banks of Rock Creek provides a buffer between the more
intense uses north of Rock Creek from the less intense uses to the south.
Development of the applicant’s property would need to be done in a manner that
would minimize any run-off towards Rock Creek with the goal of preserving the
ecological and hydrological integrity of Rock Creek.
The area shown as MOC allows for a mixture of Office and Commercial uses to
occur subject to the requirement of a Planned Zoning District. The area shown
as MOC along Chenal Parkway is intended to provide a review process, which
would allow development to occur in a manner that would respect the
environmental integrity of Rock Creek along Chenal Parkway. The area shown
as MOC at this location works in conjunction with areas located further to the
east shown as Suburban Office, which also requires the use of PZD’s for non-
residential development, provides a uniform review process to enhance the
aesthetic quality of development along Chenal Parkway while protecting the
integrity of nearby residential areas. The areas shown as Commercial in the
vicinity of the applicant fronting Chenal Parkway are accessed from a Principal
Arterial in contrast to the applicant’s property on Kanis Road, which front a
Collector Street. A change to Commercial would remove the requirement of a
PZD for developments zoned for commercial uses and would create an area
shown as Commercial fronting a Collector Street.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-18-02
4
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Gibraltar/Pt.
West/Timber Ridge, Parkway Place Property Owners Association, Spring Valley
Manor Property Owners Association, Carriage Creek Property Owners
Association, St. Charles Property Owners Association, SW Little Rock UP, and
WCLR Coalition of Neighborhoods. Staff has not received any comments from
area residents or neighborhood associations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This change would introduce a use
fronting Kanis Road that is inconsistent with the current pattern of development
along Kanis Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (March 25, 2004)
The applicant was not present at the meeting. A motion was made to defer the
item to the May 6, 2004 agenda. The item was deferred with a vote of 8 ayes,
0 noes, and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was made
to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-7435-A
Owner: Kanis Road Carwash LLC
Applicant: White-Daters and Associates
Location: 15823 Kanis Road (west side of Kanis Road,
600 feet south of Chenal Parkway)
Area: 1.035 acres
Request: Rezoning from PCD to C-3
Purpose: Future general commercial development
Existing Use: Vacant single family residence
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Kroger Store development; zoned PCD
South – Plant nursery and undeveloped property; zoned PCD and R-2
East – Creek and undeveloped property; zoned R-2
West – Lumber yard and undeveloped property (across Kanis Road);
zoned PCD and C-3
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Plans show Kanis Road right-of-way to be 30’ from centerline at this
location, which meets the requirements for a Collector Street.
2. In accordance with Section 31-176, floodway areas must be shown as
floodway easements or be dedicated to the public. In addition, a 25-
foot wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway
boundary.
3. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
Sec. 8-283 prior to construction.
4. With site development plans, construct one-half street improvements
to this street including 5-foot sidewalk.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435-A
2
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the Parkway Place and St. Charles
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial and Park/Open Space for this
property. The applicant has applied for C-3 General Commercial for
commercial development.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate
item on this agenda.
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:
On October 7, 2003, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 18,951
which rezoned the 1.035 acre property at 15823 Kanis Road from “R-2”
Single Family District to “PCD” Planned Commercial Development. The
PCD was approved for an automated car wash development. The
approved site plan included a single building (double bay automatic car
wash) with five (5) vacuum stations. A single access point from Kanis
Road was shown at the southeast corner of the property.
Kanis Road Carwash LLC, owner of the property at 15823 Kanis Road, is
requesting to rezone the property from PCD to “C-3” General Commercial
District. The rezoning is proposed to allow future commercial
development of the property.
A one-story brick and frame single family residence is currently located on
the property. There is a gravel driveway from Kanis Road which serves
as access.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435-A
3
The Kroger Store development (PCD) is located to the north, at the
southwest corner of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway. There is a plant
nursery (PCD) and undeveloped R-2 zoned property to the south. A creek
and additional undeveloped R-2 zoned property is located to the west.
The One Source Home Center (PCD), undeveloped C-3 property and the
old Kinco Construction Co. property are located to the east across Kanis
Road. There is a church and car dealership located further to the north,
along the north side of Chenal Parkway.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Mixed Office
Commercial and Park/Open Space. The applicant has filed a Land Use
Plan Amendment for a change to Commercial, which is Item 4 on this
agenda.
Staff is not supportive of the requested C-3 zoning. The property is part of
a large block of MOC (Mixed Office Commercial) at the southwest corner
of Kanis Road and Chenal Parkway, with Park/Open Space to the south
and single family further south. MOC requires a Planned Zoning
Development for mixed office/commercial and commercial developments.
The Planned Zoning Development rezoning process has been utilized for
the vast majority of recent developments in this general area (Kroger, One
Source, plant nursery, car dealerships, etc.). Staff believes that it would
be most appropriate to utilize the Planned Zoning Development process
for future development of this property, given its small size and relation to
the creek.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff suggested deferring the application to the
May 6, 2004 Agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed
by a vote of 7 ayes, 1 nay and 3 absent. The application was deferred to the
May 6, 2004 Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be withdrawn. Staff supported the withdrawal request.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7435-A
4
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for withdrawal. A motion to that effect was made. The motion
passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The application was withdrawn.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7593
Owner: K.D.V., Inc.
Applicant: D. Patel
Location: 800 Block of S. Shackleford Road (west side of
S. Shackleford Road, approximately 400 feet
south of Hermitage Road)
Area: 0.7425 acre
Request: Rezone from O-3 to O-2
Purpose: Hotel
Existing Use: Paved parking lot
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Bank and mixed office uses; zoned O-3 and C-3
South – Office and commercial developments; zoned O-3 and C-3
East – Office development (across Shackleford Road); zoned O-3
West – Mixture of office and commercial uses; including a restaurant;
zoned PCD and O-3
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. The site is near CATA Bus
Route 5 (West Markham Route), which runs a few blocks to the north.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the Birchwood and John Barrow
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7593
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for O-2 Office
and Institutional and a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Birchwood –
Walnut Valley Neighborhood Action Plan. The Commercial
Redevelopment Goal calls for maintaining and reinvigorating existing retail
areas to provide active retail for local residents. This application would
provide lodging for out of town residents.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
K.D.V., Inc., owner of the 0.7425 acre property within the 800 Block of S.
Shackleford Road (west side of S. Shackleford Road, approximately 400
feet south of Hermitage Road), is requesting to rezone the property from
“O-3” General Office District to “O-2” Office and Institutional District. The
rezoning is proposed in order to develop a hotel on the property. A
conditional use permit has also been filed (Item 9.1 on this agenda) for
the proposed hotel development.
The property is occupied by a small paved parking lot within the southeast
portion of the site. There is a shared access drive (with Financial Centre
III development) from S. Shackleford Road, which runs along the south
property line.
The general area is occupied by a mixture of office and commercial uses.
Financial Centre III office development is located immediately south, with
a furniture store and hotel further to the south. There is a bank and
additional office developments to the north. A restaurant is located
immediately west, with small scale offices along Office Park Drive. A
large office development (Arkansas Farm Bureau) is located across S.
Shackleford Road to the east.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Office. The
requested O-2 zoning does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7593
3
Staff is not supportive of the requested O-2 rezoning. Staff does not feel
that O-2 zoning is appropriate for this 0.7425 acre site, with 132 linear feet
of street frontage along S. Shackleford Road. Section 36-280(e)(2) of the
City’s Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum site area of two (2) acres for
O-2 zoning, with a minimum of 200 feet of frontage on at least one (1)
abutting boundary street. Additionally, the O-2 zoning district has
increased setbacks from side and rear property lines as compared to the
O-3 district. Given the small size of the property, staff feels that it will be
very difficult to develop without requesting variances. Therefore, staff
feels that the property should remain zoned O-3.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested O-2 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the May 6, 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 May 6, 2004 agenda. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The
application was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application needed to be deferred to the
June 17, 2004 agenda based on the fact that the applicant failed to complete the
notification to surrounding property owners as required.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the June 17, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-7593-A
NAME: Sleep Inn – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 800 Block of S. Shackleford Road; west side
OWNER/APPLICANT: David Patel
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
development of a new hotel on this vacant, .74± acre
tract. The property is currently zoned O-3. A request
to rezone the site to O-2 is a separate item on this
agenda. (See Z-7593.)
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the west side of S. Shackleford Road, one lot south
of Hermitage Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located in an area dominated by office uses and zoning. The
predominant use is larger, multi-story office buildings on larger tracts.
Other uses in the general vicinity include other hotels, a restaurant and a
furniture store. The I-430 right-of-way is located across Shackleford
Road, to the east. While staff believes the concept of developing the site
for a multistory building for a hotel with a relatively small number of rooms
is compatible with uses and zoning in the area, there are concerns about
“fitting” this specific development on this small site.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Birchwood and John
Barrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A 58-room hotel is required to have 63 on-site parking spaces based on
one space per room plus an additional 10% for staff, etc. The applicant is
proposing 52 on-site parking spaces. The parking is accessed via two
driveways off of a 24-foot private driveway that serves this lot and other
properties to the south. The hotel will not have any meeting rooms,
restaurant or bar that might generate additional parking requirements.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7593-A
2
Area set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in
accordance with Sec. 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master
Street Plan. Currently, sidewalks are constructed to both the north
and south of Financial Center 3.
2. Obtain permits prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more
information.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met. On-site fire protection will 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 fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered
connections off the private fire system. On-site fire protection will be
required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department so that they can
evaluate this site to determine the location of the additional public
and/or private fire hydrant(s) required. Any additional water facilities
will be installed at the Developer’s expense. A contact with Central
Arkansas Water will be required. This development will have minor
impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water
facilities will be size to provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7593-A
3
CATA: The site is not on a CATA Bus Route. A route is located at
Financial Center Parkway and Shackleford Road, two blocks north of
this site.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 4, 2004)
Patrick McGetrick was present on behalf of the applicant. Staff presented the
item and noted additional information was needed regarding signage, fencing,
site lighting and dumpster screening. It was noted that variances were needed
for the building height, building setback and reduced number of on-site parking
spaces. After a brief discussion, it was determined that the parking design did
comply with Code with the exception of a 3” variance in the depth requirement in
the area north of the proposed building. Staff noted that the plan complied with
the City’s Landscape and Buffer requirements. It was also noted that the plan
met the minimum requirements of those ordinances and there was no room for
error. Public Works Comments were noted, including the requirement to
construct a sidewalk along Shackleford Road. The City’s requirement that a
copy of the Bill of Assurance be submitted was also noted.
A Committee member suggested reducing the number of rooms by eliminating
one floor of the building. Mr. McGetrick responded that the development might
not work out if the number of rooms were reduced. He also stated the number of
on-site parking spaces met the hotel chain’s requirement.
Mr. McGetrick was advised to respond to staff issues by March 10, 2004. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The O-3 zoned, .74± acre tract located on the west side of the 800 Block of S.
Shackleford Road is currently occupied by an asphalt paved parking lot. The
parking lot provides overflow parking for adjacent offices. The lot is accessed via
a single driveway off of a 30-foot wide common drive easement off of
Shackleford Road.
The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the
development of a 5-story, 58-room hotel on the site. The building will have
25,173 square feet and be 65 feet in height. Fifty-two (52) parking spaces are
proposed around the hotel. Access to the site will be from two driveways off of
the common drive easement. An accompanying application has been filed to
rezone the site from O-3 to O-2; Z-7593. The proposed hotel will not have a
restaurant or meeting rooms. Signage is proposed to consist of a single ground-
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7593-A
4
mounted sign on the Shackleford Road frontage which will comply with
ordinance standards for office zones; 6 feet tall and 64 square feet in area. No
wall signage is proposed but staff would expect the building to have a sign on the
front (east) façade, again complying with Ordinance Standards; 10% coverage.
While staff recognizes that a hotel would be compatible with uses in the area, as
would a 5-story building; there are concerns that this specific proposal results in
overbuilding of the site.
The O-2 zoning district requires minimal setbacks of 25 feet on all sides. The
applicant has proposed a setback of 20 ft. 2-inches from the south property line
which is the centerline of the common access drive. The building will be located
9 ft. 2-inches from the curb of the access drive. O-2 has a building height limit
of 45 feet which may be increased incrementally as the setbacks are increased
beyond the minimums. The proposed building is to have a height of 65 feet
although the setback on the south side is less than the ordinance minimum. A
hotel with more than 20 rooms is required to have one parking space per
guestroom plus an additional 10 percent of the total for employees and
nonguests. This 58-room hotel should have a minimum of 63 parking spaces; 52
are proposed. The depth of the parking spaces and required maneuvering area
on the north side of the hotel are 3-inches less than the ordinance minimum,
even with allowing a 2-foot overhang to project into the landscape strip.
The required landscaping has been provided. The dumpster and screening have
been shown. There is no apparent bill of assurance issue. The 1916 bill of
assurance does not address use issues.
STAFF REPORT:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
On March 15, 2004, the applicant submitted a request that the item be deferred.
Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the May 6, 2004 agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the applicant had requested that the item be deferred.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 6, 2004
agenda by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7593-A
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred since
the required notices had not been sent. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
June 17, 2004 agenda. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: LU04-11-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-430 Planning District
Location: Southeast corner of W. 18th Street and Aldersgate Road
Request: Single Family to Suburban Office
Source: Byron Magness
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
This request is a Land Use Plan amendment in the I-430 Planning District from
Single Family to Suburban Office. The Suburban Office category shall provide
for low intensity development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower
density residential areas to assure compatibility. A Planned Zoning District is
required. The applicant wishes to develop the property for office uses.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded
the area of review to include the area along the west side of Aldersgate Road
from W. 18th Street to W. 20th Street covering the area between Aldersgate Road
and the alley. It is thought that the expansion would provide PZD review for non-
residential developments along the west side of Aldersgate Road and preserve
the area shown as Single Family east of the alley.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is two vacant houses currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is .32
acres ± in size. The expanded area consists of three house and several vacant
lots zoned R-2. The property to the north is vacant land zoned O-2 Office and
Institutional. The land to the east and south consists of houses and vacant land
zoned R-2. Camp Aldersgate is located to the southwest on land zoned Open
Space south of W. 20th Street. The vacant land across the street to the west is
zoned Planned Office Development, while the land zoned POD northwest of the
original application area is occupied by two office buildings.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On November 18, 2003 a change was made from Mixed Office Commercial to
Service Trades District on the west side of Old Shackleford Road about 8/10 of a
mile southwest of the applicant’s property to accommodate proposed
development.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-01
2
On March 18, 2003 a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office
on the northeast corner of W. 18th Street and Aldersgate Road across the street
to the north of the application property to accommodate proposed development.
On September 4, 2001 a change was made from Park / Open Space to
Multifamily east of W. 24th Street and Junior Deputy Road about 1/3 of a mile
southeast of the property in question to accommodate proposed development.
On July 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family and Commercial to
Park / Open Space for Birchwood Park about 1 mile northwest of the expanded
area to recognize existing conditions.
On March 6, 2001 a change was made from Single Family to Office on 1911
John Barrow Road about 1 mile east of the expanded amendment area to
accommodate proposed development.
The applicant’s property is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan.
The neighboring land to the east and south is also shown as Single Family. The
land to the southwest is shown as Park / Open Space. The land to the west and
north is shown as Suburban Office.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Aldersgate Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Collector Street and is
built to standard on the west side of the street while the east side of the street is
built with open drainage and would be subject to half-street improvements. W.
18th Street is a residential street built with open drainage needing half street
improvements to conform to design standards for commercial streets. There are
no bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan that would be affected by this
amendment.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the
applicant’s property lies in a service deficit area. Adequate park facilities would
need to be developed in order to meet any new demands created by
development on the applicant’s property.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-01
3
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant’s property lies in an area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan. The business and commercial development goal
contains the objectives of attracting job-generating businesses to the area and
encouragement of land assembly guidelines for construction of new business
and commercial facilities.
ANALYSIS:
Although the expanded area shown as Single Family contains vacant pieces of
property, the Plan has tried to keep the non-residential uses west of Aldersgate
Road and north of W. 18th Street. Even when allowing non-residential uses, they
were to be designed such that residential uses could be a viable option to the
east of the areas shown as Suburban Office. A majority of the houses in the
block where the applicant’s property is located face Perry and W. 20th Street.
However, three houses are located south of the applicant’s property along
Aldersgate Road. This amendment would further extend non-residential uses in
an area south of W. 18th Street east of Aldersgate Road.
This amendment area is located in an area of viable single-family development
inside the Hicks Interurban Addition. This neighborhood has seen an increase in
building permit activity with new single family housing being constructed east of
Aldersgate Road, which indicates that this neighborhood is a growing and viable
single-family residential area. Twelve building permits for new single-family
houses have been issued for the neighborhood in the past four-year period.
Although a change to Suburban Office would allow non-residential uses to take
place within the frame-work of the PZD review process, the area is characterized
with a large amount of vacant land zoned for office uses and shown as Suburban
Office on the Future Land Use Plan. While there are vacant lots available for
single family housing in the area shown as Single Family, there are also vacant
lots available for office development in the area shown as Suburban Office that
have not developed. This amendment would create an over-supply of land
shown as Suburban Office in this neighborhood.
Since the Suburban Office on the east side of Aldersgate Road reflects the land
use shown for the west side, this amendment would establish W. 20th Street as
the south boundary for development of Suburban Office. This change would
also establish the alley behind the applicant’s property as the boundary between
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-01
4
residential and non-residential uses. With this change most of the property in
the study area would face non-residential uses with the exception of the
northeast corner of Aldersgate and W. 20th Street. Any non-residential
development on Perry Street would face residential uses.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Barrow Action
Group, Brownwood Terrace Neighborhood Association, John Barrow
Neighborhood Association, Neighborhood Connections, Birchwood
Neighborhood Association, Campus Place Property Owners Association,
Kensington Place Property Owners Association, Pennbrook/Clover Hill Property
Owners Association, Sandpiper Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "A"
Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "B" Special Improvement District, Twin
Lakes B Prop. Owners Association, and Westbrook Neighborhood Association.
Staff has received one neutral comment from an area resident.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This amendment would increase
the amount of Suburban Office near an area with a large supply of vacant land
shown as Suburban Office.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (March 25, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the May 6, 2004
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier the by-laws for a
five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion
was made and approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent. The item
was deferred with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Monte
Moore made a presentation of item G so the discussion could coincide with the
discussion for item F. See item G for a complete discussion concerning the
Short Form Planned Office Development.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-01
5
The applicant, Mrs. Sandy Magness made a presentation to the commission and
spoke of her property ownership in the area. She acknowledged a need for
boundaries on the plan to separate the uses, however felt that when in the
neighborhood, the boundary should be at 20th Street instead of 18th Street.
Betty Snyder spoke of working to retain the neighborhood corridor in the area.
She is opposed to the development and supported the infill housing.
Ruth Bell spoke in opposition to the plan. She stated that the neighborhood was
fragile and need protection while in a period of regrowth.
A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with
a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes, and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: Z-7595
Owner: Byron and Sandra Magness
Applicant: Byron and Sandra Magness
Location: Southeast corner of West 18th Street and
Aldersgate Road
Area: 0.32 acre
Request: Rezone from R-2 to O-1
Purpose: General office use
Existing Use: Vacant buildings
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Undeveloped property (across West 18th Street); zoned O-2
East – Single family residences and undeveloped single family lots;
zoned R-2
South – Single family residences and undeveloped single family lots;
zoned R-2
West – Undeveloped property and two (2) new office buildings to the
northwest (across Aldersgate Road); zoned POD
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Aldersgate Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a Collector
Street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from the platted centerline.
2. The proposed land use would classify 18th Street on the Master Street
Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline.
3. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan.
Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development. (18’ from centerline to back of
curb)
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7595
2
4. A grading permit in accordance with section 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site
grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved
prior to the start of construction.
5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on CATA Bus Route 3 (Baptist Medical Center
part-time Route).
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the Twin Lakes, Twin Lakes “B” and
John Barrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for O-1
Quiet Office for office development.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a
separate item on this agenda.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in an area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan. The business and commercial development
goal contains the objectives of attracting job-generating businesses to the
area and encouragement of land assembly guidelines for construction of
new business and commercial facilities.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Byron and Sandra Magness, owners of the 0.32 acre property at the
southeast corner of West 18th Street and Aldersgate Road, are requesting
to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family District to “O-1” Quiet
Office District. The rezoning is proposed in order to use the existing
buildings on the property as offices. The property is made up of two (2)
platted lots (Lots 11 and 12, Block 9, Hick’s Interurban Addition).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7595
3
The property is occupied by two (2) vacant one-story frame buildings (one
on each lot). There is a gravel access drive from West 18th Street.
Undeveloped O-2 zoned property is located to the north, across West 18th
Street, with single family and office uses further north. Single family
residences and undeveloped single family lots are located to the south
and east. An office park development is located to the west, between
Aldersgate Road and I-430. Camp Aldersgate is located to the southwest.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Single
Family. The applicant has filed a Land Use Plan Amendment for a
change to Suburban Office (Item 10. on this agenda).
Staff does not support the proposed rezoning. Staff feels that the
proposed rezoning to O-1 will not be compatible with the single family
properties to the south and east. Staff views the office park property
(zoned POD) to the west as a buffer between I-430 and this area of single
family. Additionally, when the property to the north (across West 18th
Street) was rezoned to O-2 with a Land Use Plan Amendment to
Suburban Office (March, 2003), it was determined that West 18th Street
was an appropriate south boundary line for the office uses, in order to
protect the integrity of the single family area to the south and east.
During the past three (3) years, several building permits for new homes
have been issued within the R-2 zoned area between Aldersgate Road
and Junior Deputy Road, south of the office zoned property along Kanis
Road. Staff feels that allowing additional non-residential zoning within this
area would be a detriment to an area which appears to be in a stage of
single family in-fill development and redevelopment.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested O-1 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the May 6, 2004 agenda. Staff supported the
deferral request.
With a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent, the Commission voted to waive
their bylaws and accept the applicant’s request for deferral, being less than five
(5) days prior to the public hearing.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7595
4
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the May 6, 2004 agenda. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The
application was deferred.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised application to staff on March 29, 2004. The
applicant is now requesting to rezone the property from R-2 to POD (Planned
Office Development), the Magness Short-Form POD. The applicant has
submitted a site plan as part of the POD request.
There are two (2) one-story frame buildings on the site, which are similar in size
(approximately 760 square feet each). The applicant proposes to initially use the
northernmost building as a general/professional office, with the southern building
being utilized for record storage. The southern building would also possibly be
used for general/professional office use in the future.
The applicant is proposing to construct a small asphalt parking lot along the east
side of the buildings, in the rear yard. The lot will initially contain four (4) paved
parking spaces, with a possible future expansion to add three (3) more spaces, if
needed. The City’s Zoning Ordinance would typically requires a minimum of
three (3) parking spaces for the site, with both buildings being used as office.
The proposed site plan shows a landscape strip between the proposed parking
area and the buildings, with landscaping along the north side of the north
building. The applicant also proposes to install landscape screening between
the proposed parking area and the east and south property lines. The applicant
has noted that the landscape and buffer ordinances will be complied with.
The applicant is also proposing a small ground-mounted sign at the northwest
corner of the property. The sign will have a height of six (6) feet, an area of 32
square feet and be set back at least five (5) feet from the property liens.
Additional landscaping will be installed around the sign area. The proposed sign
complies with the typical ordinance standards for office zoning.
Public Works submitted revised comments for the POD proposal, which are in
paragraph A. of this report. The applicant is requesting a five (5) year deferral of
street improvements for West 18th Street and Aldersgate Road. Public Works
has indicated support of the deferral for five (5) years or until adjacent
development, whichever occurs first.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7595
5
The Little Rock Fire Department notes that fire hydrants must be placed as per
city code. Central Arkansas Water notes that water meter rates must be
changed from residential to commercial. Little Rock Wastewater notes that
sewer service is available to the property. No other utility comments have been
received by staff.
Staff does not support the requested POD zoning. For the reasons listed in
paragraph E. of the staff report, staff continues to feel that the property should
remain single family residential.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Byron and Sandra Magness were present, representing the application. Staff
noted that the application had been revised to a POD zoning, and explained the
proposed site plan for the property.
The Public Works requirements were discussed. Mike Hood, of Public Works,
noted that street improvements would be required for West 18th Street and
Aldersgate Road. A possible deferral of the street improvements was discussed.
Mrs. Magness indicated that a deferral probably would be requested.
Other office properties in the general area were discussed.
The landscape and buffer requirements for the proposed site development were
discussed. Mrs. Magness indicated that evergreen screening will be used
between the parking lot and the east and south property lines.
Mrs. Magness noted that she had received no opposition to the proposal.
She stated that she had letters from nearby property owners and businesses
supporting the office development.
After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the proposal to the full
Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Byron and Sandra Magness were present, representing the application. There
were two (2) persons present in opposition. Staff presented the revised
application (Magness Short-Form POD) with a recommendation of denial. The
proposed rezoning and land use plan amendment (LU04-11-01) were discussed
simultaneously.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7595
6
Sandra Magness addressed the Commission in support of the application. She
noted that she and Mr. Magness owned several lots in the immediate area and
had moved several homes into the neighborhood. She described the property
they owned, and noted the property owner to the north supported their rezoning.
She described other office-zoned properties in the area. She gave a brief
description of the proposed POD.
Betty Snyder, of the John Barrow Neighborhood Association, spoke in
opposition. She stated that the property should remain zoned single family. She
noted that the office use should be located elsewhere.
Commissioner Lowry asked Ms. Snyder if she would support the rezoning if it
were conditioned on the Magness’ ownership only and if the land use plan
amendment were denied. Ms. Snyder stated that she still could not support it.
Ruth Bell also addressed the Commission in opposition.
Commissioner Adcock asked if the existing gravel drive from Aldersgate Road
would be used. Mike Hood, of Public Works, stated that the only access would
be a new paved driveway from West 18th Street.
Commissioner Adcock asked which building would be used as an office. Mrs.
Magness explained that the northernmost building would be used as their real
estate office.
Commissioner Adcock asked about the need for the proposed parking lot in the
rear yard. Staff recommended that only a two-car driveway, with parking for two
(2) vehicles, be constructed, to help maintain the residential integrity of the
property. The parking issue was discussed. Mrs. Magness requested to amend
the application to provide only a two-car driveway from West 18th Street.
The proposed use of the property was discussed. Commissioner Rector noted
that the north building would be used as an office for the Magness’ real estate
office only, the south building would be used for record storage, and both
buildings could be used as single family residential in the future. Mrs. Magness
agreed with the uses as described by Commissioner Rector, and amended the
application accordingly.
There was a motion to approve the Land Use Plan Amendment as filed. The
motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes and 11 nays. The Land Use Plan Amendment
was denied.
There was a second motion to approve the Magness Short-Form POD as
amended (as noted above) to include the deferral of street improvements for
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7595
7
West 18th Street and Aldersgate Road for five (5) years or until adjacent
development, whichever occurs first. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes
and 0 nays. The POD application was approved.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z-7596
Owner: Holly Stevens
Applicant: Terry Burruss
Location: 5201 Asher Avenue (southwest corner of
Asher Avenue and Anna Street)
Area: 1.03 acres
Request: Rezone from I-2 to C-3
Purpose: Restaurant with bar and private club
Existing Use: Restaurant with bar
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Mixture of commercial uses along Asher Avenue; zoned C-3
South – Single family residences, undeveloped property and industrial
uses; zoned R-3 and I-2
East – Mixture of commercial uses along Asher Avenue; zoned C-3, C-4,
I-2 and I-3
West – Mixture of commercial uses along Asher Avenue and Mabelvale
Pike; zoned C-3 and I-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Asher Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 45-feet from centerline (reduced
cross section) will be required.
2. The proposed land use would classify Anna and 33rd Street on the
Master Street Plan as a commercial streets. Dedicate right-of-way to
30 feet from centerline.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on CATA Bus Route 14 (Rosedale Route), and near
Route 17A (Mabelvale/UALR Route).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7596
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 Curran-Conway, Midway and
South of Asher Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Commercial and Light Industrial for this property. The applicant
has applied for C-3 General Commercial for a new addition to an existing
restaurant. A Land Use Plan amendment is not required.
The Light Industrial shown south of Asher Avenue was originally intended
to encourage industrial development based on a corridor plan created by
the Asher Corridor Steering Committee in early 2000. The committee
recommended the current Land Use and Zoning designations show for
the properties approved in October of 2000. The overall design of having
Commercial Uses north of Asher, with Industrial Uses south is still valid.
The area in question was changed to Light Industrial to encourage small
scale industrial and Service Trades types of uses. Since the area was not
vacant at the time of the Land Use and Zoning changes, any new
development due to the changes would likely take time. The changes
were approved within the past five years, the recommended Land Use
and Zoning changes have not had sufficient time to result in the physical
changes desired by the steering committee. This Zoning request would
compromise the integrity of the Land Use Plan and Zoning changes
recommended by the Asher Corridor Steering Committee.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest
Neighborhood Action Plan. The Economic Development goal listed an
action statement of promoting Asher Avenue as a viable commercial and
service corridor.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Holly Stevens, owner of the 1.03 acre property at 5201 Asher Avenue
(southwest corner of Asher Avenue and Anna Street), is requesting to
rezone the property from “I-2” Light Industrial District to “C-3” General
Commercial District. The rezoning is proposed in order to operate a
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7596
3
restaurant with bar and private club. There is currently a restaurant with
bar service (a permitted I-2 use) being operated on the property.
The property is occupied by a one-story commercial building located
within the south half of the property. There is paved parking between the
building and Asher Avenue. There are existing access drives from Asher
Avenue and Anna Street.
This general area along Asher Avenue is comprised of a mixture of
commercial and industrial uses. There is a drive-in restaurant and motel
west of the site, with various auto-related uses at the intersection of Asher
Avenue and Fair Park Blvd. Other various commercial uses, including two
(2) lumber yards, are located to the east and north (across Asher
Avenue). Single family residences, undeveloped property and industrial
uses are located to the south.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial
and Light Industrial. The proposed C-3 zoning does not require a change
to the Land Use Plan.
Staff is not supportive of the requested C-3 zoning. As noted in
paragraph D. of this report, the C-3 zoning would compromise the integrity
of the Land Use Plan and Zoning changes recommended by the Asher
Corridor Steering Committee in 2000. The Committee recommended the
current zoning and land use for this and surrounding properties in October
of 2000. The south half of this property, (where the building is located),
as well as the property to the east and south are shown as Light Industrial
on the Future Land Use Plan. Staff believes this property should be
utilized for permitted light industrial uses. Staff believes it is premature to
make this type of Zoning change in the Asher Corridor area, until the area
has a chance to develop as the steering committee envisioned in 2000.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the May 6, 2004 agenda. Staff supported the
deferral request.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7596
4
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the May 6, 2004 agenda. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The
application was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be withdrawn. Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for withdrawal. A motion to that effect was made. The motion
passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The application was withdrawn.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
NAME: Geyer Springs Church of Christ –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 6004 West 53rd Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Geyer Springs Church of Christ
PROPOSAL: A revision to a previously approved conditional use
permit is requested to allow for use of a church
education building as a dormitory for seminary
students and families. The previous approval was for
up to 10 single men. The current proposal is for up to
25 persons, including some single men and some
families. The property is zoned R-2.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the north side of West 53rd Street, one lot east
of S. University Avenue.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The church itself has been a part of this neighborhood for many years.
The buildings were once home to classes of the Central Arkansas
Christian School. The intensely commercial University Avenue corridor is
adjacent to the west. A C-3 zoned apartment complex is adjacent to the
east. A mixture of R-2 zoned residential properties and C-3 zoned
commercial properties are located around the site. Allowing the use of a
portion of the existing building for a dormitory use should not affect the
church’s compatibility with the neighborhood. Staff does, however, have
concerns about the specifics of this use.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Geyer Springs and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site contains a large parking lot that is mostly unused except on
worship service days. Additional parking is located on the south side of
West 53rd Street, around the church office building. It is anticipated that
some of the students will not drive. There is adequate parking on the site.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
2
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: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved
reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is
required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be
installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW)
requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the
assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed
by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results
must be sent to CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days
of installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Kealts at
992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention
requirements for this project.
Fire Department: May be required to be sprinkled. Contact Fire Marshall.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: A CATA Bus Route is located just west of the site, along S.
University Avenue.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 4, 2004)
Jerry Oates and Lee Motes were present representing the application. Dana
Carney, of the Planning Staff, informed the Committee that he, Interim Planning
Director Steve Beck and Plan Examination Administrator Mark Whitaker had
toured the facility. Mr. Carney informed the Committee that there were
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
3
numerous building code violations that needed to be addressed in relation to this
use. It was noted that a condition of the previous approval was “compliance with
building code requirements for conversion of a portion of this building into a
residential occupancy.” Mr. Carney noted that the building was being occupied
and these requirements had not been complied with. Staff presented a report
from Mr. Whitaker based on his walk-through of the facility. His report included
the following comments:
• In regard to habitable dwellings, any use intended as an apartment should be
equipped with potable water within the unit. Retrieving drinking and cooking
water from a common restroom is not appropriate.
• If apartments are developed, rated demising walls should exist between the
units. This would require the separation to be extended up to the deck, taped
and sealed.
• Some of the units were using multiple extension cords for hot plates, crock-
pots and other similar appliances. Again an apartment setting would be
required to have dedicated electrical circuits for major kitchen appliances
such as a stove, refrigerator or deep freeze. This setting may lead to an
electrical short and cause a fire in the building. Some additional circuitry
wiring could be required to minimize this possibility.
• The existing restrooms and the closet were not designed to exhaust the
shower moisture. Ventilation, properly sized is required to vent this humidity
to the outside. This moisture will lead to environmental problems if not
remedied. If apartments were developed, individual bathrooms would be
required. Drinking fountains are needed on each floor.
• The exit doors must provide 34 inches in the clear for minimum egress. This
does not include the strike or the jamb on the door. Therefore, most egress
doors are 36 inches wide. The existing doors have been altered and the
correct width may not be available. Exit lights are request to be operational
on either end of the halls. Emergency lighting should be installed in the
corridors.
• Hard-wired smoke detectors with an auxiliary power source are required in
each sleeping unit, properly installed, and interconnected with detectors in
the hallway. The existing HVAC system should be upgraded with a smoke
detector shutdown control on the return air plenum.
• The sleeping areas must have an operational window to the outside which
gives a clear opening of 20 inches in width, minimum and 24 in height and
provide a clear area of 5.0 square feet for the ground floor and 5.7 for the 2nd
floor. The two minimum dimensions will not equal 5.0 square feet.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
4
• Some applications should be made toward making the first floor area barrier
free for those with physically disabilities. This would include the entrance into
this area and the restrooms that exist on the first floor. Upgrades would be
contingent on the amount of financial improvements evaluated at fair market
value.
The applicants stated they would review the list and get with someone about the
required changes.
It was noted that there were no Landscape or Public Works Comments. Utility
Comments were noted.
The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Geyer Springs Church of Christ occupies the R-2 zoned property located at 6004
West 53rd Street. The site contains a sanctuary building, an education building
and a detached multipurpose building. Parking is located around the church and
across West 53rd Street. The church is part of a consortium of Churches of
Christ that conduct the Alpha and Omega Bible Institute. The Bible Institute
(seminary) trains men of Spanish heritage for ministry. The Institute’s classes
are conducted at Central Church of Christ (formerly 6th and Izard Church of
Christ). On December 4, 2003, the Planning Commission approved a conditional
use permit allowing an unused, two-story education building on the Geyer
Springs Church of Christ campus to be converted into dormitory style housing for
up to 10 single male students of the Institute. The classroom building was to be
converted into rooms and common bathroom facilities were to be located on
each floor. The students were to have access to the church kitchen and dining
facilities which are located in the detached, multipurpose building. The Planning
Commission’s approval included the following conditions:
1. Occupancy of the site is to be limited to no more than 10 students of the
Alpha and Omega Bible Institute. Occupancy is limited to the students only;
no other persons, including family members are permitted to occupy the site.
2. Compliance with building codes requirements for conversion of the building
into a residential occupancy.
3. There is to be no additional signage.
The church is now requesting a revision to that previously approved conditional
use permit. The school has grown and it has been discovered that some of the
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
5
students wish to bring their wives and children with them while they go through
the Institute. The church is asking that occupancy of the building be increased to
25 persons, including students, wives and children.
On March 2, 2004, staff conducted an inspection of the facility and found that the
two-story building had been converted into 8 living units; 4 upstairs and 4
downstairs. It was noted that the units were occupied; some by single men and
some by families. A single shower stall had been constructed in a utility room on
the ground floor and individual shower stalls had been placed in the men’s and
ladies’ rooms on the second floor. A representative of the Building Codes
Division accompanied staff and noted several concerns related to the occupancy
of the building. It appears that no permits had been obtained for what
remodeling had occurred. It also appears that the church has not complied with
the condition of the initial conditional use permit approval that building codes
requirements be complied with. His comments after that “walk-through”
inspection are as follow:
• In regard to habitable dwellings, any use intended as an apartment should be
equipped with potable water within the unit. Retrieving drinking and cooking
water from a common restroom is not appropriate.
• If apartments are developed, rated demising walls should exist between the
units. This would require the separation to be extended up to the deck, taped
and sealed.
• Some of the units were using multiple extension cords for hot plates, crock-
pots and other similar appliances. Again an apartment setting would be
required to have dedicated electrical circuits for major kitchen appliances
such as a stove, refrigerator or deep freeze. This setting may lead to an
electrical short and cause a fire in the building. Some additional circuitry
wiring could be required to minimize this possibility.
• The existing restrooms and the closet were not designed to exhaust the
shower moisture. Ventilation, properly sized is required to vent this humidity
to the outside. This moisture will lead to environmental problems if not
remedied. If apartments were developed, individual bathrooms would be
required. Drinking fountains are needed on each floor.
• The exit doors must provide 34 inches in the clear for minimum egress. This
does not include the strike or the jamb on the door. Therefore, most egress
doors are 36 inches wide. The existing doors have been altered and the
correct width may not be available. Exit lights are required to be operational
on either end of the halls. Emergency lighting should be installed in the
corridors.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
6
• Hard-wired smoke detectors with an auxiliary power source are required in
each sleeping unit, properly installed, and interconnected with detectors in
the hallway. The existing HVAC system should be upgraded with a smoke
detector shutdown control on the return air plenum.
• The sleeping areas must have an operational window to the outside which
gives a clear opening of 20 inches in width, minimum and 24 in height and
provide a clear area of 5.0 square feet for the ground floor and 5.7 for the 2nd
floor. The two minimum dimensions will not equal 5.0 square feet.
• Some application should be made toward making the first floor area barrier
free for those with physically disabilities. This would include the entrance into
this area and the restrooms that exist on the first floor. Upgrades would be
contingent on the amount of financial improvements evaluated at fair market
value.
Staff is still supportive of the concept of allowing this building to be used as
dormitory housing for the Institute’s students; even of expanding occupancy to
25 persons, including some family members. However, there are substantial
concerns that the building has not been properly remodeled to accommodate the
use as approved in December 2003. Consequently, staff cannot support any
additional occupancy.
There is no bill of assurance issue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the revised conditional use permit application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicants were not 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
May 6, 2004 Agenda. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7482-A
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had obtained the
required building permits to properly remodel the structure to accommodate the
proposed residential use. Staff recommended approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in
Section 6 of the staff report and compliance with building code requirements.
Betty Snyder, of the Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association, stated the
applicant had agreed to a limit of 16 adults and to park vehicles only on the
paved surface. Jerry Oates, representing the church, stated he agreed to those
additional conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff, including the additional conditions presented by Ms. Snyder and agreed to
by Mr. Oates. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: J FILE NO.: Z-7586
NAME: Adams Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 9009 Woodford Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT: Earthalene Adams
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
conversion of the residence on this R-2 zoned
property into a day care center for 16 children with 3
employees.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the east side of Woodford Drive, north of
Seymour Drive.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The Merrivale Neighborhood is exclusively single family residential. Other
uses are adjacent to the neighborhood, fronting onto Baseline Road.
These other uses include multifamily and a variety of light industrial and
commercial businesses. A nonconforming mobile home park is located to
the east of Merrivale. This proposed day care center is located on a
residential cul-de-sac, all adjacent properties are occupied by single family
residences. Staff supported the applicant’s request for a special use
permit for a day care family home across the street, at 9008 Woodford, in
1997. The current proposal is not a day care family home. There will be
no residential occupancy. Staff does not feel this is the appropriate
location for this use. Allowing this nonresidential use will have a negative
effect 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 SWLR United for Progress
and West Baseline Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A day care center for 16 children with 3 employees requires a minimum of
4 on-site parking spaces. This property has a single-wide driveway and
carport that would allow for the stacked parking of up to 3 vehicles. The
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7586
2
applicant does live across the street and does not need to park on this
site. The parking arrangement does not meet code requirements for
access and maneuverability.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
• If a playground is to be established, it will need to be screened from
adjacent residential property with a 6-foot high opaque wooden fence
with its face side directed outward. Additionally, if an expanded
parking area is to be developed, it will be required to be properly
screened and landscaped.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. No Comments. Woodford is an improved residential street with curb
and gutter.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock
Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required
placement of the hydrant(s), and contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Additional
water facilities will be installed at the developer’s expense.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. The nearest route
is located on Baseline Road, several blocks to the north.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7586
3
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 4, 2004)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding signage, days and hours of operation, fencing
and parking. It was noted that the playground area should be screened from
adjacent residential properties and any new parking areas should be landscaped
and buffered per Code requirements. The applicant stated she would install
landscaping as screening since the rear yard was already enclosed by a 4 foot
tall chain-link fence. Staff noted the lack of parking on site to comply with the
Code requirement. It was also noted that the applicant lived at 9008 Woodford,
directly across the street and would not need to park at this location. Staff
pointed out two provisions of the valid bill of assurance that were germane to the
request as follow:
f. All of said lots should be used as residential lots only.
g. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any lot except
one professional sign of one square foot.
In response to a question from the Committee, Ms. Adams stated she no longer
operated the day care family home at 9008 Woodford; that she had been
operating the day care at 9009 for about a year. Utility comments were noted.
The applicant was advised to meet with Water Works regarding the fire hydrant
comment, since the Fire Department had responded with approval.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by March 10, 2004. The
Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned property located at 9009 Woodford Drive is occupied by a one-
story, brick and frame, single family residence that is typical of housing in the
neighborhood. The property has a single-wide, paved driveway that is deep
enough to stack 3 vehicles. The rear yard is enclosed by a 4 foot tall, chain-link
fence. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow use of the
property for a day care center with an enrollment of 16 children and 3
employees, including the applicant. No residential occupancy of the property is
proposed. The applicant has been conducting day care operations at this
location for approximately one year, without prior approval. The applicant lives
across the street from the site, at 9008 Woodford Drive. On August 21, 1997,
the Commission granted the applicant a special use permit to operate a day care
family home in her residence at 9008 W oodford. She has since ceased that
business and relocated the day care to 9009 Woodford. The proposed day care
center is to be open from 6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7586
4
playground area will only be used during day light hours. The day care requires
4 on-site parking spaces; 1 per employee and 1 for on-site drop-off and pick-up
of children. The property has parking for 3 vehicles stacked end to end. This
parking arrangement does not comply with Code. The applicant proposes to
place a one square foot wall sign on the building. No ground sign is proposed.
Staff does not support the requested conditional use permit. This property is
located on a cul-de-sac in a single family residential neighborhood. The
applicant does not propose a day care family home but rather a day care center,
with no residential occupancy of the structure. Such a use is very different in
character from a day care family home. Staff does not believe it is appropriate to
allow this solely commercial use in this residential neighborhood. The use could
be better located outside of the heart of the neighborhood, perhaps along
Baseline Road, to the north of the neighborhood.
The bill of assurance for the Merrivale Subdivision is still valid and includes the
following provisions that are pertinent to the issue:
1. All of said lots should be used as residential lots only.
2. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view or on any lot except
one professional sign of one square foot.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicant was present. There was on objector present. Staff informed the
Commission that the applicant had submitted a request that the item be
deferred. Staff stated that deferral request had not been received five days prior
to the meeting, as required by the Commission’s Bylaws. There was no further
discussion.
A motion was made to waive the Bylaws and to accept the late request for
deferral. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
The item was then placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to
the May 6, 2004 agenda. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7586
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were three objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of denial.
Clarence Hicks addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated
the state allowed a day care family home without requiring the operator to reside
in the home. Mr. Hicks stated there was parking for 4 vehicles at 9009 Woodford
and Ms. Adams would allow employees to park at her residence at 9008
Woodford.
Commissioner Meyer stated the Commission had to abide by City regulations.
Mr. Hicks stated Ms. Adams’ presence was good for the neighborhood and
helped reduce crime in the area.
Commissioner Lowry stated he could not support the application if Ms. Adams
did not live in the house.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, stated the League was opposed to
the application since it was not for a day care family home, where the applicant
lived in the home.
Troy Laha, representing the neighborhood association, spoke in opposition to
the item.
Jane Harrison, of 8617 Crofton Circle, spoke in opposition. She showed a video
of traffic associated with day care family homes in her neighborhood.
Mr. Hicks stated he objected to comparing Ms. Adams’ day care with one that
had been a problem.
In response to a question from Chairman Rahman, Ms. Adams stated she was
purchasing the property at 9009 Woodford, under contract. Ms. Adams stated
she had operated the day care at that location since 2002.
Mr. Hicks asked if the Commission would be more supportive if Ms. Adams lived
in the home. Chairman Rahman responded he would. Commissioner Lowry
stated it must be her principal residence. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff,
discussed the difference between the Special Use Permit and Conditional Use
Permit process.
A motion was made to approve the application. The motion was denied by a
vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K FILE NO.: Z-7592
NAME: Liberty House Correctional Facility –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 1815 West Roosevelt Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Gracie Eason/Jerry Larkowski
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
use of the existing residence on this R-4 zoned
property as a correctional facility for up to 15 persons.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of West Roosevelt Road;
midblock between Wolfe and Battery Streets.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within an older, residential neighborhood. The
neighborhood is comprised primarily of single family residences although
it does also contain some of the nonresidential elements typically found in
or near a residential neighborhood. A LRSD elementary school, Mitchell
Academy, is located to the northwest. Two day care centers are located
on Battery Street; one half block north of Roosevelt and one block south
of Roosevelt. The neighborhood contains a variety of housing stock
ranging from vacant-boarded structures to newer and newly remodeled
homes and older homes of some historic significance. Staff does not
believe this proposed use is compatible with uses in the area.
The applicant is required to notify all property owners or persons operating
a business within 500 feet of the site. Staff notified all residents within
300 feet who could be identified and the South End, Wright Avenue, MLK
and Downtown Neighborhood Associations of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Liberty House proposes to house up to 15 individuals, most of whom will
be driving their vehicles to and from the site. Some may be picked up by
fellow employees or others. Additionally, the facility will have a security
guard and 1 to 2 employees of an administrative nature. The possibility
exists that up to 18 parking spaces may be needed. The site currently
has parking for two vehicles with access off of the alley. There is no direct
access to Roosevelt Road. The applicant proposes to park 3 vehicles
adjacent to the house, parallel with the alley, and to park 4 vehicles in the
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
2
rear yard area. There is not enough space adjacent to the house for
parallel parking without blocking the alley and the only way 4 vehicles can
be parked in the rear yard is if 2 vehicles are stacked one behind the
other. The applicant has received permission to use 5 parking spaces on
the church site across Roosevelt Road, but only Monday through Friday.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
• If a parking area is to be developed, it will need to provide appropriate
screening and landscaping to meet with zoning buffer and landscape
ordinance requirements.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if a larger or additional meter is
required. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little
Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required
placement of the hydrant(s) and contact. Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Additional
water facilities will be installed at the developer’s expense.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. Nearest bus routes
are located along Battery Street to the west and West 24th Street, to the
north.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
3
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 4, 2004)
Gracie Eason and Jerry Larkowski were present representing the application.
Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding
signage, fencing and parking. Staff asked the applicant to provide greater details
of the operation of the facility including number of employees, security measures
and transportation. Staff noted the relative lack of parking on site and asked the
applicant to provide plans for parking. Staff noted that the bill of assurance was
no longer valid. Staff noted the development standards and review criteria for
correctional facilities as outlined in Section 36-107 of the code and pointed out
that the facility was within 500 feet of a school. Staff commented that variances
would likely be needed for the separation requirement and reduced parking.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were noted.
In response to a question from the Committee, Mr. Larkowski stated residents
at the facility would initially be nonviolent misdemeanor and traffic offenders.
Mr. Larkowski stated contact had been made with the church located across
Roosevelt Road about use of some of the church’s parking spaces. Staff
cautioned that the church could only agree to allow use of surplus parking;
spaces available above the church’s minimum parking requirements.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by March 10, 2004. The
Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-4 zoned property located at 1815 W. Roosevelt Road is occupied by a
two-story, brick and frame residential structure and a detached accessory
building. The applicants propose to convert the house into a correctional facility
to be known as The Liberty House. The Code defines a Correctional facility as:
Correctional facility means a staffed and supervised community
based transitional facility for housing persons serving all or part of a
sentence or probation, for violation or conviction of a criminal
offense, and which may also provide structured programs and
services such as counseling and job placement to the residents.
This definition excludes jails, prisons and detention centers
operated by any local, county, state or federal government, and
facilities operated by any state agency subject to statutory notice
provisions.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
4
The applicant has submitted the following description of the proposed facility:
The Liberty House will be first of its kind here in Little Rock. Our
program is designed to be used initially as a probation component
for criminal and traffic courts to use as a jail substitute for those
gainfully employed. Once this pilot project proves a success, we
intend to seek approval from the Arkansas legislature to expand
this program to further relieve jail overcrowding and to preserve
jobs here in Little Rock, and hopefully soon at other sites around
the state.
The 1815 W. Roosevelt site will be the flagship of the Liberty
House. It can house at most 15 participants, all of whom initially
will be male. We already have tentative arrangements for parking
with neighbors. We intend this site to initially accept non-violent,
misdemeanor and traffic offenders who will be paying for their
housing from their paychecks, as opposed to the various local
governments being responsible for their boarding costs. While at
the Liberty House, they must maintain their employment, but will be
required to remain at the home when not working. Releases will be
approved for appointments with doctors, lawyers, counselors,
therapists, etc.
We do not intend to have a sign in front of the Liberty House. At
most, I can envision no more than a flat sign attached to the front
of the house, no more than 120 square inches identifying it as the
Liberty House. At this point, we have no changes in store for
fencing.
This site of the Liberty House should never have more than 2 to 3
employees present at a time. Accordingly, they will park in the
spaces already available at this address. The Liberty House will
provide restricted-freedom living space for criminal justice
offenders. This site will only house non-violent misdemeanor and
traffic offenders who are gainfully employed. There will be very
little activity during the daytime, as our clients will be/should be
employed during those hours. During the evening and at night, the
clients will be restricted to the property of the Liberty House where
they will sleep, clean up, wash clothes, and have periodic light
activities available during their stay. This site will be staffed by a
security guard while clients remain at the home. Also, we envision
1 to 2 employees of an administrative nature to work from this site
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
5
as well. The landlord has plans to install a security system on all
windows and doors so that if any client tried to leave the premises
without staff’s knowledge an alarming signal would function.
We envision most clients will be driving their vehicles to and from
the Liberty House. There may be some that are picked up by
fellow employees or someone else who assists them with
transportation. We have secured from our neighbor across
Roosevelt, the Gospel Temple Missionary Baptist Church, the use
of five (5) parking spaces. These spaces are available Monday
through Friday. We believe we can fit six (6) regular sized vehicles
on the premises at this time. To the extent we need a parking
waiver; we would request one as well.
We have complied with, and will continue to comply with, all
provisions of Ordinance No. 36-107(13) of the Little Rock City
Code.
The Development standards and review guidelines from Section 36-
107.(13) of the Code are:
(13) Separation, spacing, and procedural requirements for
correctional facilities shall be determined by the Planning
Commission so as not to adversely impact the neighborhood.
Correctional facilities are subject to the following additional
requirements:
a. Before a conditional use permit for a correctional facility
can be granted, the applicant shall clearly establish the
following:
1) All property owners or persons operating a business
within five hundred (500) feet of the property line of
a proposed correctional facility have received notice
by certified mail of the exact location of the property
and its intended use;
2) This required notice was sent to each person before
any contract for operation of the facility was
granted, that this notice properly sets forth the exact
procedure and time frame for the person notified to
register objections with the appropriate
governmental agency, and that proof of such notice
is provided as required for conditional use permits;
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
6
3) The facility is not located within five hundred (500)
feet of the property line of any school, any facility
that operates programs for youth, or another
correctional facility;
4) The applicant has conducted two (2) public hearings
after having first advertised the meetings and
location prominently not less than five (5) nor more
than seven (7) days prior to each meeting; that such
advertisement was prominently displayed and not a
mere legal advertisement, in a newspaper with
seven (7) days a week county-wide circulation;
5) Procedures are in place should the permit be
granted that the chief of police shall be notified
within one (1) hour that a resident of the facility has
escaped or failed to return when required;
6) Adequate security measures are in place to prevent
any resident of the correctional facility from violating
subsection (5) more than once in a thirty-day period.
Staff does not support the requested conditional use permit. In addition to
concerns about the compatibility of the proposed use with this
neighborhood, the proposed facility cannot be operated at this site without
parking and separation variances. The facility is proposed to house up to
15 individuals and 2 to 3 employees; all of whom potentially could be
driving. The site could perhaps accommodate 4 vehicles and the 5
spaces on the nearby church parking lot are only available Monday
through Friday. The Code requires that correctional facilities not be
located within 500 feet of the property line of any school or any facility that
operates programs for youth. A day care center is located 250± feet
south of the site on Battery Street. A second day care center is located
200± feet north of the site on Battery Street. A LRSD elementary school
is located 150± feet to the northwest, across Roosevelt Road.
The applicant submitted responses to questions raised at Subdivision
Committee and reflected in the analysis above. The 1890 Bill of
Assurance does not address use issues. The applicant is requesting a
parking variance and a variance from the 500 feet separation requirement.
Neighborhood meetings were held at the Williams Library, 18th and
Chester, on February 10 and 12, 2004.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
7
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicants were not present. There were several objectors present. Staff
informed the Commission that the applicant had requested that the item be
deferred. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
May 6, 2004 meeting. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were several objectors present and letters
and petitions of opposition had been received and forwarded to the Commission.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial.
Jerry Larkowski spoke on behalf of the application. He stated there was a need
for programs such as this due to jail overcrowding. He stated Liberty House
would only accept non-violent, misdemeanor and traffic offenders. Mr. Larkowski
stated the residents’ freedom would be restricted but they would be permitted to
work. He amended the application to reduce the number of persons to 10
residents and 1 employee and to allow use of the site only through December
31, 2004. Mr. Larkowski stated there were 4 parking spaces on the site and 5
spaces had been secured from the church located across Roosevelt Road. He
requested a parking variance and a variance from the separation requirement
from the nearby school and daycares. Mr. Larkowski stated the residents would
be working away from the site while the school was in session. He stated he
had recently read of drug and gun arrests in the neighborhood. He surmised
that Liberty House would have a stabilizing effect on the neighborhood.
Mr. Larkowski emphasized that Liberty House was not a halfway house. He
stated the residents of the house would be paying to stay there; reducing the
burden on the jail system.
Doug Eaton, of the LRSD, read a statement from the School Board in opposition
to the application, due to the site’s proximity to the Mitchell School.
Bettye Shead, of 2604 Marshall Street, stated the majority of the nearby
residents were elderly and many did not have the finances to purchase
protective devices. She asked the Commission to deny the application.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: K (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7592
8
Arthur Williams of 2601 State Street, spoke in opposition on behalf of the South
End Neighborhood Associations Coalition. He stated the proposed use did not
comply with the area’s neighborhood action plan and was not an appropriate use
for the site.
Lisa Two Rivers, of 2505 Wolfe Street, spoke in opposition. She stated the
neighborhood had struggled through difficult times but was coming back. She
voiced concern that the proposed use would hinder those efforts.
Arkie Byrd, of 2415 Wolfe Street, stated she was opposed to the item.
Evelyn Coleman, of 2409 Schiller Street, asked the Commission to deny the
application.
James Floyd, president of the Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association, spoke
in opposition. He suggested the applicant look at locating on the site of the old
VA Hospital, on East Roosevelt Road.
John Gerard, of 1709 West 24th Street, stated the community supported the
concept; just not at this location.
Mr. Larkowski responded by re-emphasizing the security of the facility and the
non-violent nature of the proposed residents.
Commissioner Floyd stated he felt it was a great idea; just in the wrong place.
Commissioner Lowry asked if thought had been given to visitors that might come
to the house. Mr. Larkowski stated family visitation only would be arranged and
scheduled on weekends and security would always be present.
Commissioner Lowry asked what the worse types of convictions the residents
would have. Mr. Larkowski responded the convictions would be misdemeanor
and no sex crimes.
Commissioner Williams stated he did not think it was a good idea to introduce
criminals into this neighborhood.
A motion was made to approve the application, as amended. The motion failed
with a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
NAME: Chenal Mini-Storage – Revised Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION: 24,300 Chenal Parkway
OWNER/APPLICANT: Chris Thornton/Patrick McGetrick
PROPOSAL: A revision to a previously approved and revised
conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
splitting of a single second phase into two separate
phases, to allow a reconfiguration of buildings, the
addition of climate controlled space and the addition
of a two-story building containing some general
commercial lease space. The property is zoned C-3.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the east side of Chenal Parkway, approximately 350
feet north of Cantrell Road (Hwy. 10).
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
A conditional use permit for the phased construction of a mini-warehouse
development was first approved for this site in 1997. The first phase was
constructed at that time and has been in operation since then. The
current proposal does not expand the boundary of the site nor should it
change the development’s compatibility with the neighborhood. Since the
original approval, addition nonresidential and multifamily development has
occurred in the general area around the site.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Pinnacle, Aberdeen and
DuQuesne Place Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site will continue to be accessed via the single driveway off of Chenal
Parkway. Four customer parking spaces are located adjacent to the office
building. Adequate driveways and parking are located around each of the
mini-warehouse buildings. The lower floor of the Phase IV building is
proposed to be used for permitted C-3 commercial and office uses. A 33-
space parking lot will be located in front of this building. Uses within that
building must be limited to those requiring no more than 33 total parking
spaces. No restaurant is proposed or will be permitted in the Phase IV
building.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
• Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is
required.
• The proposed parking area does not provide for the 8-percent (1,117
square feet) of interior landscaping required by the landscape
ordinance. Interior landscape islands must be at least 7 ½ feet in
width and 150 square feet in area. Additionally, a small amount of
building landscaping is required between the public parking and
building. There is considerable flexibility with this requirement.
• A 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 northern perimeter of the site. In addition to this screening
requirement, the northern land use buffer are must be re-established
with trees and shrubs. This area has suffered significant erosion and
will require re-stabilization prior to a final certificate of occupancy being
issued.
• Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
• An irrigation system to water landscaped area will be required.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required prior to any additional land clearing or grading activities at the
site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and
approved prior to the start of construction.
2. In accordance with Section 29-186(f), a Sketch Grading and Drainage
Plan will be required. Contents must address all requirements in
Section 29-188(a).
3. Provide a schedule showing dates for completing the installation of
erosion controls on site and restoring adjacent disturbed property.
4. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
3
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met. Separate water service to this
phase will be required unless the parcels are combined to form a
single parcel. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the
meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any
metered connections off the private fire system. On site fire protection
will be required and will be installed at the Developer’s expense. This
development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution
system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per Code.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. A CATA express
route is located along Cantrell Road, to the south.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 4, 2004)
Patrick McGetrick was present representing the application. Staff presented the
item and noted additional information was needed regarding building height and
design, signage, hours of operation, site lighting, dumpster screening and
fencing. Staff asked that the proposed phase lines be more clearly delineated
and any areas of outdoor storage be labeled. Staff noted that a copy of the Bill
of Assurance needed to be submitted. Staff informed Mr. McGetrick that the
uses proposed in one of the building (top floor warehouse and bottom floor
office/showroom) were not permitted in C-3, even with a conditional use. He was
asked to clarify the use of that building. Public Works and Landscape
Comments were discussed at length. It was noted that this site was currently in
violation of the City’s Land Alteration Ordinances and a restoration plan needed
to be submitted. Mr. McGetrick was advised to submit a restoration plan
addressing the violation and a sketch grading plan for the current proposal. It
was noted that the applicant had actually encroached on an adjacent property
with his illegal grading. Mr. McGetrick noted that adjacent property was not
included in this application and the applicant and adjacent property owner were
working to resolve the issue. Mr. McGetrick was again advised that the land
alteration violation needed to be addressed.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
4
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by March 10, 2004. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On May 15, 1997, the Commission approved a conditional use permit allowing
for the two-phased construction of a mini-warehouse development on this C-3
zoned tract. The phase line split the site roughly in half, north and south. Phase
I, the south half, consisted of 12, one-story buildings and a two-story manager’s
office/apartment. Phase II consisted of 12 more, one-story buildings. Areas for
RV and boat storage were shown in each phase. On May 2, 2000, staff
approved a modification to the approved site plan. The phase lines remained as
approved. The modification allowed a more east-west orientation of the
buildings in each phase and a consolidation of the approved square footage into
fewer buildings. Phase I consisted of 9 buildings, eight lying east to west and
one lying parallel to Chenal Parkway. Phase II consisted of 8 buildings lying east
to west. Areas for RV and boat storage were maintained in each phase. Phase
I was constructed. On December 7, 2000, the Commission approved a revision
of the conditional use permit. That revision allowed one of the buildings in
Phase I to be used for conditioned mini-warehouse and realigned the Phase II
buildings. Phase II was approved for 6 buildings to be oriented roughly parallel
with Chenal Parkway. Eight spaces for storage of RV’s and boats were shown in
Phase II. Truck rental was added as a permitted use. Eight spaces either for
truck rental or RV and boat storage were shown in Phase I. The building
facades facing Chenal Parkway were required to be brick.
None of the Phase II buildings have been constructed, although the applicant
has done grading on that portion of the site in violation of the City’s Land
Alteration Ordinance. An appeal of that Land Alteration Violation notice is a
separate item on this agenda.
The applicant is now requesting approval of a revision to the conditional use
permit. The previously approved Phase I has been indicated as Phases I and II.
These two phases have been completed. The previously approved Phase II (the
north half of the property) is now proposed as Phases III and IV. Phase III is
proposed to consist of 5 mini-warehouse buildings lying east to west. Four of the
buildings are one-story in height. One of the buildings, due to the terrain is two
stories on the south side and one-story on the north side. The top floor is
proposed to be more climate controlled (conditioned) mini-warehouse space.
Twelve spaces of parking for RV and boat storage are shown in Phase III.
Phase IV is now proposed to consist of a single, two-story building lying parallel
to Chenal Parkway, with a parking lot located between the building and the
street. The top floor is proposed to contain climate controlled (conditioned) mini-
warehouse space and the bottom floor is proposed to be divided into tenant
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
5
spaces for various permitted C-3 uses. Due to the terrain, access to the upper
floor will be through the mini-warehouse development at the back and access to
the lower floor will be from the front. There will not be access from the lower
floor to the upper floor. The mini-warehouse buildings will be constructed of
metal. The commercial/office building will have a metal roof and back. The
façade facing Chenal Parkway will be brick and metal. Existing signage will
remain for the mini-warehouse development. A new ground-mounted sign,
meeting Chenal Parkway overlay standards, will be erected in front of the
commercial/office building. Hours of operation for the mini-warehouse
development are 24 hours, 7 days a week. Hours for the commercial/office
building are 7:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Site lighting will be
located on the buildings and will be directed downward and inward. Parking lot
lighting for the commercial/office building will be on 15-foot tall poles and will be
shielded downward and inward to the site. Screening will be installed on the
perimeters of the site.
Although there have been issues related to land alteration, staff continues to be
supportive of the proposed development.
On March 10, 2004, the applicant submitted responses to the issues raised at
Subdivision Committee and reflected in the analysis above. There is no bill of
assurance issue. The uses proposed for occupancy of the lower floor of the
commercial/office building must comply with the parking requirements for a 33
space parking lot. This will assure a mix of low intensity uses. The issue of the
land alteration violation must be resolved prior to the issuance of any permits for
further construction on the site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Staff Comments and Conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5
and 6 of the staff report.
2. All roofing is to be constructed of nonreflective material.
3. All signage must comply with the Chenal Parkway overlay standards.
4. The façade of the commercial/office building must be constructed of brick,
with metal trim only.
5. All site lighting must be shielded downward and into the site.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
6
6. The land alteration violation issue must be resolved and the site brought into
compliance with the Land Alteration Ordinance prior to the issuance of any
permits for any construction on the site.
7. Uses within the ground floor of the commercial/office building must comply
with the ordinance established parking requirement for a parking lot with 33
spaces. No restaurant will be permitted on the site.
8. Use of the mini-warehouse buildings, including the climate controlled
buildings, must comply with the Ordinance definition of a “mini-warehouse”
and not be used for bulk storage or warehousing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicant was present. At 7:00 p.m. the total number of Commissioners
present at the meeting dropped to eight (8). According to Planning Commission
Policy, Chairman Rahman offered a deferral to the April 8, 2004 Agenda to all
remaining applicants. The Commission had previously determined to make the
informal meeting of April 8, 2004 a public hearing, beginning at 4:00 p.m.
The applicant asked that the application be deferred to the April 8, 2004 Agenda.
A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 8, 2004)
The applicant was present. One objector arrived at the meeting after the item
had been acted on by the Commission. Mike Hood, of Public Works, informed
the Commission that the applicant had just provided a grading plan and had not
yet provided a drainage plan. He asked that the item be deferred until the
grading and drainage plans had been submitted and reviewed. There was no
further discussion of the issue.
A motion was made to defer the item to the May 5, 2004 Commission meeting.
The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
Mr. Gene Pfeifer, of 16,300 Cantrell Road, later appeared at the meeting and
asked to make a statement since he was to be out of town on May 6, 2004. The
Chair allowed the statement.
Mr. Pfeifer stated the applicant had violated the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance
and, in fact, had graded onto adjacent property that he, Mr. Pfeifer, owns. He
asked the Commission not to approve any amendment to the C.U.P. until the
Land Alteration violation was addressed. Mr. Pfeifer stated the applicant had
also violated the Subdivision’s bill of assurance.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: L (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5600-C
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There was one objector present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval. Staff informed the Commission that
the grading and drainage plans had been submitted and approved. Mike Hood,
of Public Works, stated there were two issues on this site; the conditional use
permit and the land alteration violation. He stated the land alteration had been
addressed.
Patrick McGetrick, project engineer, stated what was being requested was a
revision to a previously approved conditional use permit. He stated the applicant
had complied with staff requirements and was in the process of correcting the
land alteration violation.
Chris Parker, attorney for adjacent property owner Gene Pfeifer, stated the
applicant had graded a portion of Mr. Pfeifer’s property. He stated the previously
approved conditional use permit showed a 45-foot buffer adjacent to Mr. Pfeifer’s
property that had now been removed and the applicant was proposing to replace
it with a 30-foot buffer.
Chairman Rahman asked if it was not a matter of private litigation. Mr. Parker
responded that it was but he was asking the Commission not to approve any
amendment to the conditional use permit until the issue was resolved.
Commissioner Rector commented that Mr. Pfeifer had recently rezoned his
adjacent property to C-3 and no buffer was now required. He stated that while
he was sympathetic to Mr. Pfeifer’s concern, it was not a zoning issue. Mr.
Parker responded by stated the Commission could require a buffer through the
conditional use permit review. He asked the Commission not to reward the
applicant by reducing the buffer below what had been required under the
previous conditional use permit.
Chairman Rahman asked if reducing the buffer would, in fact, not be rewarding
the applicant. Commissioner Rector stated the situation had changed since Mr.
Pfeifer had rezoned his property. Commissioner Rector stated he was not in
favor of violating City Ordinances but the applicant had developed an approved
remediation plan.
There was a brief discussion of the issue of penalizing or rewarding the
applicant.
Penny Collins Choate, attorney for the applicant, stated the applicant had done
everything the City had asked of him. She stated there was a private lawsuit
involving the applicant and Mr. Pfeifer and the Commission hearing was not the
proper forum to discuss that issue.
There was a brief discussion of the site plan.
A motion was made to approve the application, including all staff
recommendations and comments. The motion was approved by a vote of
8 ayes, 3 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: M FILE NO.: Z-7594
NAME: Vasquez Accessory Dwelling –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 6720 Mabelvale Cut-Off
OWNER/APPLICANT: Jamie and Ruth Vasquez
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
conversion of the existing accessory structure on this
R-2 zoned, .39± acre tract into an accessory dwelling.
The applicant is not proposing to occupy either
dwelling.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the northeast corner of Mabelvale Cut-Off and
Warren Drive.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
Although the surrounding neighborhood is primarily single family in zoning
and use, there are other uses in the general vicinity. Two large apartment
complexes are located to the east, on either side of Mabelvale Cut-Off. A
nonconforming skating rink is located nearby to the northeast. Duplexes
are located across Mabelvale Cut-Off to the south. Single family homes
are located north, south and west of the site. While staff is generally
supportive of accessory dwellings, the applicant, in this case, does not
propose to occupy either dwelling. There has been a history of concern
about substandard rental property in this area and staff is concerned that
allowing the proposed two rental units may not be in the best interest of
the nearby single family residential neighborhood.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The principal dwelling and accessory dwelling are required to have one
on-site parking space each. The site has paved driveways off of
Mabelvale Cut-Off and Warren Drive. There is adequate parking available
on site to accommodate both dwellings.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: M (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7594
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
Water: No objection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is located on a CATA Bus Route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 4, 2004)
The applicant, Ruth Vasquez, was present. Staff presented the item and noted
the applicant was requesting a variance from the requirement that the property
owner occupy one of the dwellings. In response to a question from the
Committee, Ms. Vasquez stated the house was currently being rented. Staff
noted that the site had adequate parking to serve both dwellings. Public Works,
Landscape and Utility Comments were noted. Staff informed the Committee that
the property was not within a subdivision and was not covered by a bill of
assurance.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to
the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned property located at 6720 Mabelvale Cut-Off is occupied by a one-
story, brick and frame single family residence and a detached, block accessory
building. The block building was at one time utilized as a recording studio and
contains a control room, performing studio, storage space, kitchen, restroom
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: M (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7594
3
and shower. The recording studio was a nonconforming use. The house and
accessory building both have paved driveways and parking pads.
The applicants are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow the
block accessory building to be converted into an accessory dwelling. The
applicants do not propose to occupy either dwelling. They are requesting a
variance from Section 36-252 of the Code which requires that the landowner
occupy one of the dwellings.
Staff is not supportive of the requested conditional use permit. While staff is
generally supportive of accessory dwellings, there are concerns about the fact
that the applicants do not propose to occupy either of these dwellings. There
has been a history of concern in this neighborhood about substandard rental
property. Staff feels that allowing the conversion of the block building into
another dwelling, thus creating two rental units on this site, could have a negative
impact on the adjacent single family neighborhood. The property is not located
within a subdivision and is not covered by a valid bill of assurance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
The applicant was present. At 7:00 p.m. the total number of Commissioners
present at the meeting dropped to eight (8). According to Planning Commission
Policy, Chairman Rahman offered a deferral to the April 8, 2004 Agenda to all
remaining applicants. The Commission had previously determined to make the
informal meeting of April 8, 2004 a public hearing, beginning at 4:00 p.m.
The applicant asked that the application be deferred to the April 8, 2004 Agenda.
A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 8, 2004)
The applicant, Ruth Vasquez, was present. Ms. Eugenia Williams was present
assisting Ms. Vasquez. There were two objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of denial.
Ms. Williams stated the block building had previously been used as a recording
studio and contained a kitchen and bath facilities. She stated Ms. Vasquez had
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: M (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7594
4
purchased the property as an investment. Ms. Williams asked that the
Commission approve the application. She asked what the structure could be
used for if the application were denied.
Chairman Rahman stated it would not be as much of an issue if the applicant
proposed to occupy one of the dwellings. Ms. Williams reiterated that the
property was purchased as an investment, with the intent to rent both dwellings.
Ms. Vasquez stated she understood the neighbors’ concerns about some of the
other properties in the area. She stated she took care of this site.
Chairman Rahman stated the Zoning Ordinance required the property owner to
occupy one of the dwellings.
Commissioner Rector explained the concept of “accessory dwellings”. He voiced
support for the concept of converting the structure into a dwelling and asked if
the property could be subdivided so that there would be one principal dwelling on
each lot. Monte Moore, of the Planning Staff, responded that the property could
be subdivided but there would likely be variances due to relationship of the
structures to the property lines. Commissioner Rector stated that would be
better than setting the precedent of supporting “non-owner” occupation of
accessory dwelling sites. He asked if the item could be deferred and amended
to a plat or PRD. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated staff would prefer
that this application be withdrawn and a completely new application filed.
Commissioner Floyd commented that he could not support this application,
although he was sympathetic to the applicant’s situation.
Cindy Dawson, of the City Attorney’s Office, stated a deferral might be
appropriate. Ms. Vasquez agreed to a deferral.
Janet Berry, of SWLR United for Progress, stated the applicant did attend a
meeting of the association. She stated the applicant has made improvements to
the site. Ms. Berry stated the neighbors had concerns about “rental property”.
She commented that whatever mechanism was employed, there would still be
two rental dwellings.
Commissioner Rector commented that the neighborhood might benefit from
having a derelict building fixed up.
Troy Laha, of 6602 Baseline Road, stated he was speaking a behalf of
neighboring property owners who were opposed to neither dwelling being
occupied by the property owner.
A motion was made to defer the item to the May 6, 2004 Commission meeting.
The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: M (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7594
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had just submitted a
request that the item be withdrawn since she had filed a PRD application to
subdivide the property into two, single family lots. There was no further
discussion.
A motion was made to waive the bylaws and to accept the late withdrawal
request. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for withdrawal by a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N FILE NO.: Z-7585
NAME: The River Tower Long-form PD-R
LOCATION: On the Northeast corner of River Bend Road and River Front Drive
DEVELOPER:
The Hathaway Group
1001 North University Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72207
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 3.2 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office
ALLOWED USES: General Office
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Twelve Story Residential Condo Development (50 - Units Total)
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the construction of a single 12 story building on this 3.2
acre site at the northeast corner of Riverfront Drive and Riverbend Road. The
applicant has indicated living areas consist of 180,000 square feet while the
parking deck has 54,000 square feet of area. The applicant has indicated the
maximum building height is 175 feet. The proposed height is slightly less than
the exiting Alltel building located to the southeast. The building is to have a rera
yard setback of 25-feet.
The applicant has indicated the floors will consist of the following:
Floors 1 –2 will be used as a parking deck with 50 spaces per level, Floor 3 will
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
2
be the amenities floor for exercise, storage, meeting, guest suites, Floors 4 –11
will be used as living units at six units per floor and a total of 48 units and Floor
12 will contain two penthouse units.
The layout provides 43 spaces for visitors, staff and event parking adjacent to
Riverfront Drive. The applicant has indicated landscape areas are significant
with approximately 30 percent of the development reserved for green spade.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located in the Riverdale area which as developed with a mixture of
uses. The site is a grass covered vacant site. There is a single-family
neighborhood located to the east of the site and another located to the north and
northeast. To the south of the site is the Alltel complex and to the west of the
site is a private school and an office building.
Other uses in the area include multi-family and warehouse activities.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing staff has received several phone calls from area residents in
opposition of the proposed request. Staff has also received several phone calls
from area residents requesting additional information and some in support of the
proposed request. The Sherrill Heights Garden Club, all residents located within
300-feet of the site and all property owners located within 200-feet of the site
were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works:
1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Provide sidewalks with appropriate
handicap ramps on all boundary streets.
2. To minimize traffic conflicts, design the traffic circle at the property frontage to
FHWA standards. Directional islands should be provided to move traffic
counter clock-wise, with a turn radius appropriate for the design vehicle.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: No construction within the existing sewer easement. Sewer is
available and not adversely affected. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at
688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: No comment received.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
3
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off
the private fire system. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at
992-2438 for additional information.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional details.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights/Hillcrest Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Planned Residential Development for high-rise multifamily
building.
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.
Landscape: Proposed street buffer width along Riverfront Drive falls short of the
minimum nine (9) foot allowed by both the zoning and the landscape ordinances.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
4
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 1, 2004)
The applicant has present. Staff stated the proposed request was for a planned
development to allow the placement of a twelve story residential building on the
site. Staff requested Mr. Hathaway give a brief overview of the proposed
request.
Mr. Hathaway stated the development would be developed under a horizontal
property regime with all units owner occupied. He stated the proposed
development would be approximately 175 feet in height. He stated the
development would contain 50 residential units. Mr. Hathaway stated
approximately 30 percent of the site would be heavily landscaped.
Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the
proposed site plan. Staff requested building elevations of the proposed
development. Staff also requested the applicant locate the dumpster on the site
plan. Mr. Hathaway stated the dumpster was internal to the building.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the development would
be required to repair and or replace any curb, gutter or sidewalk in the right-of-
way prior to occupancy.
Staff noted the comment from Little Rock Wastewater. Staff stated the
development could not construct any buildings within the existing 25-foot utility
easement. Staff stated the applicant should contact Little Rock Wastewater to
resolve any and all outstanding issues associated with the proposed request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted building elevations and a revised plan to staff
addressing most of the issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee
meeting. The applicant has not indicated any building construction within the 25-
foot utility easement but the developer will have to work closely with Wastewater
to ensure no damage is done to the line during construction.
The applicant has indicated the proposed development sign will be a ground
mounted precast sign with etched letters. The sign is proposed as four feet in
height and eighteen feet long. The total sign area is 72 square feet. The typical
signage allowed in multi-family zones is a maximum of six feet in height not to
exceed twenty-four square feet in sign area. Staff is supportive of the requested
signage.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
5
The development includes the placement of 50 residential units, which results in
a density of 15.6 units per acre. The development would be allowed through a
Conditional Use Permit under the existing zoning to develop multi-family per the
R-5 zoning district or at a density of not more than thirty-six units per acre.
The applicant has indicated a total of 143 parking spaces on the site plan. The
proposed development would typically require seventy-five parking spaces or
one and one-half spaces per unit.
The applicant is requesting to develop the site with a structure 175 feet in height.
The site is currently zoned O-3, General Office District which would allow for
construction of a building sixty feet in height if all applicable setbacks are met.
The zoning ordinance also includes an R-6 high-rise apartment district. The
maximum building height in this zoning district is one hundred twenty-five feet.
The applicant has indicated a reduced buffer along Riverfront Drive. The
required buffer in this area would typically be a minimum nine foot landscape
strip. The applicant has indicated by reducing the street buffer the building will
be shifted to the west to allow additional setback from the rear property line.
Staff has some concerns with the overall proposal. Staff feels the use is
appropriate for the site and the proposed development will no doubt be a “quality
development”. The development would be able to develop at a greater density
than proposed under the current zoning. The applicant has indicated the
building has been situated to take advantage of views for all the units on all the
levels. The proposed development contains three floors of parking and
amenities before reaching the first of the residential units. The applicant has
also designed the structure to sit on a base and the area of the residential units
will be “pulled back”.
Staff does however have concerns with the proposed building height and
proposed building setback. To the east of the site is a condo development
consisting of two to four story units. Staff has some concerns of the impact a
twelve story building will have on these existing residential units with the close
relationship to the rear property line.
The applicant has indicted the building height to be similar to the Alltel Building
located to the south. The Alltel Building is located on a large tract and has a
larger setback from the roadways. The proposed setback from the rear property
line is very close to an existing wastewater utility easement. The sewer line
located in this area is the main feeder line serving West Little Rock. The
Wastewater Department has indicated construction in this area is allowable but
the placement of the pylons will be very closely supervised to ensure no damage
is done to the line.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
6
As stated staff has some concerns with providing a recommendation of approval
based on the current design. Staff feels a reduced scale of the development
would be more appropriate for the site.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised plan indicating a
reduction in the number of units and increased building setbacks. Staff stated they
were requesting the item be deferred to the May 6, 2004, Public Hearing to allow staff
additional time to review the new site plan.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda for deferral to the May 6, 2004, Public Hearing. The motion was approved by a
vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Mr. Jim Hathaway was present representing the request. There were several objectors
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the applicant’s
amended request. Staff stated the applicant had redesigned the building to be located
no closer than 80-feet from the eastern property line. Staff stated the previous plan
indicated the building at 25-feet from the eastern property line. Staff stated the
applicant had also indicated the glass portion of the tower will be no closer than 100-
feet from the eastern property line. Staff stated the applicant had decreased the
number of units from 50 to 38 and added one story to the building resulting in a 13-story
building. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the first two levels would continue to
house parking and level three would continue to be an amenities floor. Staff stated
floors 4 – 12 would each contain residential living quarters at four units per floor and
level thirteen would contain two living quarters or the penthouse units. Staff stated the
applicant had indicated the ground floors would be screened from the eastern property
line with dense plantings and extensive landscaping adjacent to the parking deck. Staff
stated level three would also be screened with year around evergreen plantings in
planter boxes along the east wall. Staff stated the applicant had indicated every effort
would be made to direct views away from the adjoining properties to the east.
Staff stated the applicant had indicated the building would be 165 feet in height to the
rooftop of the penthouse units and 181 feet in height to the top of the mechanical
penthouse. Staff stated the mechanical penthouse was located adjacent to Riverfront
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
7
Drive, away from the residential properties to the east. Staff stated the site was
currently zoned O-3 and with a Conditional Use Permit development of the site as R-5,
Urban Residential District was an allowable use. Staff stated the typical maximum
building height for this zoning district was 45-feet with a maximum height of sixty feet.
Staff stated the Zoning Ordinance also allowed for development of R-6, High-rise
Apartment District, although this was not an allowable use under the Zoning Ordinance
for O-3, General Office District. Staff stated the maximum building height was 125-feet
for the R-5, Urban Residential District. Staff stated this information was being give to
the Commission for reference purposes.
Staff stated the applicant had indicated two levels of parking on the proposed site plan
as well as surface parking for guest. Staff stated the site plan included the placement
of 100 plus parking spaces on the site. Staff stated the proposed parking was
adequate to meet the typical minimum parking required for a multi-family development
or one and one-half spaces per unit. Staff stated the proposed development had
incorporated the parking within the building to allow for additional greens spaces. Staff
stated the typical multi-family development placed the parking around the proposed
buildings decreasing the available area for landscaping and green spaces. Staff stated
they felt with the placement of parking within the proposed building would enhance the
proposed development.
Staff stated the applicant had indicated signage on the proposed site plan. Staff stated
the proposed sign area was four feet by eighteen feet and a total area of seventy-two
square feet. Staff stated the typical signage allowed in multi-family developments per
the Zoning Ordinance was six feet in height and twenty-four square feet of sign area.
Staff stated they were supportive of the proposed signage.
Staff stated they were supportive of the proposed development as amended. Staff
stated the applicant had increased the building setback and reduced the number of
units proposed within the development. Staff stated the applicant had indicated a
density of 11.8 units per acre well within the allowable density of the R-5, Urban
Residential District. Staff stated the applicant had moved the building as close as
feasible to Riverfront Drive to increase the building setback from the eastern property
line. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a reduced landscape buffer along
Riverfront Drive. Staff stated the proposed site plan indicated a 6.9-foot minimum
landscape strip along the roadway. Staff stated this was sufficient to meet the
Landscape Ordinance requirement.
Staff stated they felt the proposed development was a classic in-fill development and
the applicant had done a good job of working within restricted perimeters of an
established area. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the development would result
in the construction of high quality residential housing east of University Avenue adding
to the downtown housing market. Staff stated in addition the site was located in an
area of mixed uses ranging from single-family residential to industrial uses. Staff stated
the developer had tried to minimize staff’s concerns by increasing setbacks and
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
8
reducing the density of the development. Staff stated they had always been supportive
of the proposed use of the site and felt multi-family an appropriate use for the site.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance
with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report.
Mr. Jim Hathaway was present representing the request. He stated the development
was a quality development and in his opinion the best development he had brought the
Commission in his 37-years of appearing before the City. He stated the development
was the first of its type since the mid to late 1980’s. He stated the development would
have several amenities including a full staff. Mr. Hathaway stated the development had
been situated to take advantage of the river view for all the proposed units. He stated
landscaping would add to the character of the site. He stated the eastern property line
would be heavily landscaped to limit the intrusion to the single-family homes located to
the east.
Mr. Hathaway stated economics were important to the development. He stated with the
reduction in the number of units he needed an additional floor to allow the development
to remain affordable as far as maintenance fees. He stated overall the number of units
had decreased from fifty units to thirty-eight units. He stated the entrance to the
development would be from River Bend Drive or Riverfront Drive. He stated the
development was placing guest parking along Riverfront Drive to limit the intrusion to
the residential to the east.
Mr. Dick Downing addressed the Commission in opposition of the request on behalf of
the River Bend Property Owners Association. He stated the area ten years ago did not
exist as it existed currently. He stated the neighborhood was not opposed to the use of
the property only the height of the building. He stated the proposed development was a
planned development which did not have limitations except those imposed by the
Commission. He stated the request far exceeded the allowable height in R-5, Urban
Residential District. He stated the maximum height of a cell tower was 150-feet and the
requested high-rise tower exceeded that height as well. Mr. Downing stated the request
was three times that allowed under the O-3, General Office District zoning classification.
Mr. Downing introduced graphic representations of the effect the building would have
on the adjoining properties. He provided a representation of each of the views the
eastern property owners would have when the new tower was constructed. He also
produced a study indicating the shadow effect the tower would have on adjoining
properties. Mr. Downing demonstrated the River Bend property owners would have
some shadowing every day of the year for some portion of the day.
Mr. Downing also addressed the Commission atop a ten-foot ladder indicating his
position atop the ladder was similar to the effect the tower would have on the adjoining
River Bend Properties. He stated the request was to big and to tall for the site.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
9
Mr. Carl Whillock addressed the Commission as a member of the Board of Directors for
the River Bend Property Owners Association. He stated there were thirty-four owners
of property in the River Bend Subdivision and thirty-one of those had signed a petition
expressing concerns with the proposed height of the building. He stated of the
residents of Canal Point ninety percent of the property owners had also signed a similar
petition expressing concern of the proposed building height. Mr. Whillock stated he had
been informed one-half of the property owners in Tree Tops had also signed a petition
expressing concern of the proposed height of the building.
Mr. Whillock stated the neighborhood had concerns with lighting. He stated with the
tower lights would shine into the adjoining residents homes. He stated the request was
something that should not be allowed because of its massing. He stated if the building
were lower or an office uses as allowed under the current O-3, General Office District
zoning this would be an acceptable use. He stated office users would not be accessing
the site after 5:00 pm, which was typically when the residents of River Bend were
returning home to enjoy their evenings. He stated the proposed project was located in
the wrong place. He stated there was property located in the area, which was suitable
for this type development and would not have an impact on existing single-family
homes. He stated one-half mile north of the site was a vacant tract and the nearest
resident was two hundred feet away. He indicated three additional locations where the
proposed development would have a limited impact on adjoining properties.
Mr. Hathaway addressed the Commission once again on the merits of the
development. He stated the majority of a neighborhood in opposition did not indicate a
majority of the citizens of the City. He stated the proposed development would
generate $483,000 per year in increased tax base.
Mr. Hathaway stated the development had been moved back as far as feasible to limit
the impact on the nearby residents. He stated his firm conducted a shadow study. He
stated he did not present the study to the Commission because the findings were no
longer relevant. He stated the building had been narrowed, moved from the property
line and increased in height. He stated a building one story taller would not cast the
same shadow.
Commissioner Rector questioned if other locations had been explored. Mr. Hathaway
stated he had looked at other sites but the proposed site was best suited to the
proposed development based on the size and shape. He stated with river views if you
were not the first building then there would come a time that someone would develop
the site to take full advantage of the view. In this case that would mean building a high-
rise building.
Mr. Hathaway stated there were other parts of the country that were developing mix-
housing types. He stated high end housing in the same community weather single-
story of multi-story if the homes were of the same value this would not affect the resale
of the nearby homes.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: N (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585
10
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the shadow
effect on adjoining properties. The discussion included comments that a one hundred
twenty-five foot building would not cast the same shadow as a one hundred eighty foot
building. Comments were made concerning an eight story building versus a thirteen-
story building. The Commission indicated the lesser building height was not the action
before the Commission for a vote.
Commissioner Rector questioned the allowable uses of the site. Staff stated the site
was zoned O-3, General Office District and the allowed maximum building height was
sixty feet. Staff stated with a conditional use permit the site could develop with
densities allowed under the R-5 Zoning District or thirty-six units per acre.
Commissioner Rector stated his role was to look at the overall development plan and
weigh in his decision what would be allowed on the site. He stated with the current
zoning a five-story office building or a multi-family development at close to three times
the density proposed could locate on the site.
Commissioner Floyd stated he was supportive of the proposed development. He stated
he felt the request was located in the wrong place. He stated had the tower existing
prior to the residents of River Bend purchasing their homes he did not feel they would
have bought in that location.
Commissioner Williams indicated he also supported the project but not in the proposed
location. He stated River Bend and Canal Point were there first and he felt adding the
tower would have a negative impact on their properties.
A motion was made to approve the request as presented to the Commission. The
motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 3 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
NAME: Bowman Kanis Retail Center Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Kanis Road and Bowman Road
DEVELOPER:
Dickson Flake Partners
1200 West Capitol
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 8.1 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: O-3, PCD and C-3, with conditions
ALLOWED USES: O-3 and C-2 permitted uses with a 300-foot by 150-foot no
build area at the intersection
PROPOSED ZONING: C-3, O-3 and Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Creation of an eight (8)-lot plat with Lot 1 to develop as a
PCD for USA Drug, Lot 7 to develop with O-3 listed uses
and Lots 2 – 6 and 8 to develop with C-3 listed uses.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance to allow reduced driveway spacing for Lot 1.
2. A variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
3. A variance to allow site grading without a proposed development.
4. A variance to allow a vertical cut greater than ordinance standard.
BACKGROUND:
On October 20, 1998, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,850
rezoning an 11.25-acre tract to O-3 and C-3 on the northwest corner of Kanis and
Bowman Roads. The proposal included the development of the site with a 300 foot by
150 foot no build area at the intersection of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The site had
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
2
limited driveways onto Kanis Road. The eastern drive, located approximately 200-feet
west of the Kanis/Bowman Road intersection, was proposed as a right-turn exit only.
The western driveway, located approximately 300 feet west of the Kanis/Bowman
intersection, was to be a service entrance/exit only. The approval also limited the
permitted uses to those listed in the “C-2” Shopping Center District.
A proposal which included this tract of land was reviewed and approved by the
Commission earlier this year but was not forwarded to the Board of Directors for final
action. The applicant proposed to rezone the site from various zoning classifications to
PCD to allow the development of a home center on the site.
Ordinance No. 18,985 adopted November 18, 2003, established the Bowman and
Kanis Retail Center Long-form PCD. The Planning Commission heard the proposal at
their October 16, 2003 Public Hearing and forwarded a recommendation of approval to
the Board of Directors.
The applicant proposed a seven-lot plat through the Planned Development process.
Lots 1 - 6 were zoned C-3, General Commercial and Lot 7 was zoned O-3, General
Office. The applicant proposed a USA Drug to locate on Lot 1 (an allowable use under
the C-3 zoning classification) but the building was proposed to be located within the
area previously approved as a no-build zone (300-foot by 150-foot).
The applicant indicated only one lot would be developed under the proposed
development plan and requested Lot 1 be designated with PCD zoning (with C-3 uses
as alternative uses) retaining the C-3 and O-3 zoning on the other six lots.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approved PCD to allow the
addition of gas pumps to the original USA Drug PCD. The applicant also intends
to add an additional 1.8 acres to the previously approved preliminary plat with
land area located to the north of previously proposed Lot 7.
The applicant has removed the building from the 300-foot by 150-foot no build
zoned and has indicated the gas pumps outside this area as well.
The proposed lot (Lot 8)will be served by a shared access and utility easement
located on the east and south property lines.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing non-conforming nursery. The property is located in
an area of mixed zoning and extremely varied uses. The intensely commercial
Chenal Parkway/Bowman Road intersection is directly north of the site. Uses in
this area include a wide variety of retail commercial businesses such as Sam’s,
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
3
Wal-Mart, Garden Ridge and Best Buy. Across Bowman, at the northeast corner
of Kanis and Bowman Road is a PCD, which has developed as an
office/warehouse/retail center. The C-3 and PCD zoned properties to the south;
contain a variety of uses including offices, office/warehouse and mini-warehouses.
The area to the west of the site contains single-family homes on large tracts.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association, the
Parkway Place Property Owners Association, all owners of property located
within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site
were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The standard conditions shown on the plans as "Public Works Notes" apply
to the project.
2. On Bowman, street improvements should match the improvements made to
the east. In addition to the lanes shown, dual left turns should be provided
for in the design.
3. Per the previous approval, the northern-most driveway should be moved
south away from the property line.
4. Street Improvement plans shall include signage, striping and modifications to
the signal. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to
construction.
5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site
grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to
the start of construction. Terracing, cut and fill slopes must comply with the
land alteration ordinance.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: No comment received.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
4
Central Arkansas Water: The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are
planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas
Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected
by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of
Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. If there are facilities that need to
be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would
be done at the expense of the developer. A Capital Investment Charge based on
the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges.
This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private
fire system. Please submit two copies of the plans for the private fire line to
Central Arkansas Water for review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of private fire line. Approval of plans by the Arkansas
Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is
required. Central Arkansas Water requests that a 15-foot-wide utility easement
be dedicated adjoining the west lot line of Lot 7 to accommodate an existing 2-
inch water main. A water main extension would be required to serve Lot 6. All
Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water
service must be met. This development will have minor impact on existing water
distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for
additional information.
Fire Department: Additional fire hydrants may be required. 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: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property.
The applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial
Development to add gas pumps.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and
Commercial Development goal seeks to maintain the residential integrity of the
neighborhood with the objective of adhering to the Future Land Use plan and
lists an action statement of requiring developments in the neighborhood to
adhere to the Future Land Use plan.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
5
Landscape: Areas set aside for landscaping and buffers appear to meet city
requirements.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 19, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented the
request to the Committee members indicating the requested revision was to
allow the addition of gas pumps to the original Lot 1 of the development and to
add additional acreage with an additional lot to the previously approved
preliminary plat. Staff requested Mr. White provide additional information to
complete the review process. Staff stated details concerning proposed signage
should be provided (height/area) on the proposed site plan. Staff also requested
the total area of each lot be provided on the proposed site plan.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Bowman Road should be
constructed to match the improvements located to the east of the site. Staff also
requested the applicant provide dual left turn lanes at the intersection. Staff also
stated a grading permit would be required prior to development of the site.
Mr. White stated he was requesting a variance to allow the entire site to be
graded without specific developments for Lots 2 – 8. Mr. White stated the cut
would be approximately a fifty foot cut. He stated a three to one slope could be
achieved without benching.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the February 19, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated signage details on the proposed site plan. The applicant has
indicated signage will be consistent with signage allowed in commercial zones or
a maximum of thirty-six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed signage. Staff would recommend the
signage be limited to a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square
feet in area. Staff feels with the development of eight lots on this corner and
each individual lot having a separate free standing sign the maximum signage
allowed in commercial zones would cause visual clutter to the area.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
6
The proposed development includes the development of a lot without public
street frontage. The lot is also requesting an off premise sign easement. Staff is
supportive of this proposed lot configuration and sign location.
The applicant has indicated the total lot area on each of the proposed lots. The
lots range in size from 0.56 acres to 4.05 acres. The proposed lots are currently
zoned PCD, O-3 and C-3. The applicant has indicated sufficient area to meet
the minimum lot size requirement per the zoning ordinance. The applicant has
also indicated a twenty-five foot platted building line adjacent to the roadways.
The proposed front yard building line is adequate to meet the minimum
requirements of the zoning ordinance.
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 5:00 am
to 1:00 am seven days per week. The applicant has also indicated the garbage
collection will be scheduled from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm to limit the impact on the
single-family homes located to the south and west of the site.
The applicant has indicated a maximum building height of 35-feet consistent with
maximum building heights allowed by the O-3 and C-3 zoning district. The
applicant has also indicated site lighting will be low level and directional, directed
inward away from residentially zoned properties.
The proposed site plan for the USA Drug Store (Lot 1) indicates a total building
square footage of 10,500 square feet and a total of 105 parking spaces. The
typical minimum parking required for a building of this sized based on one space
per three hundred square feet of gross floor area would be 35 parking spaces.
As indicated in the background section, a 150-foot by 300-foot area was
previously designated as a no build area. The applicant has indicated 51 parking
spaces within the previously set no-build zone. This area was also limited to
uses listed in the C-2 Shopping Center District zoning classification. The
applicant is proposing the placement of a drug store with gas pumps. Although
this is an allowable use under the C-3 zoning district a convenience store with
gas pumps (the most direct comparison) is not an allowable use under the C-2
zoning district. The previously approved PCD requested C-3 uses as alternative
uses for the site.
The applicant is requesting a fifty-foot cut along the western edge of the
property, which is a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance. The applicant
is also requesting to be allowed to grade Lots 2 – 8 without a specific
development. Staff is not supportive of this request. The Land Alteration
Ordinance specifically prohibits indiscriminate clearing of property. The
ordinance also states cuts or fills shall be limited to ten feet in height or fifteen
feet if architectural stone is included to protect the vertical face. Staff is not
supportive of this request.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
7
Staff is not supportive of the proposed request. Staff feels the placement of gas
pumps at this location is not in keeping with the desired development pattern
previously approved. The historical development pattern has been to keep the
hard commercial uses east of Bowman Road and allow commercial uses to step
down west of Bowman Road. Staff feels if this intense development is allowed
to locate west of Bowman Road the domino effect will take place resulting in
Kanis Road being lined with commercial uses.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 11, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated they were requesting the item be deferred to the
March 25, 2004 Public Hearing to allow additional time to review additional information
submitted by the applicant related to the requested cut and fill of the site.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent
Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of deferral to the
April 22, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated there were concerns related to the proposed
grading of the site and staff and the applicant were working to resolve these
outstanding issues.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for
placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. A motion was made to
approve the request as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff and the applicant have meet on numerous occasions to resolve staff’s concerns
with the proposed grading of the site. Staff is not supportive of grading activities on the
entire site. Staff is however supportive of allowing grading activities to take place along
Bowman Road without a development. Staff feels with the placement of street
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
8
improvements along the proposed lots abutting the street some disturbance will take
place. Staff is not supportive of allowing the developer to grade the area indicated as
Lot 6 prior to a development being secured.
The proposed site includes the placement of a fuel canopy near the Bowman Kanis
Road intersection. Staff continues to not support the placement of the fuel station at
this location or on the site.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant and staff were still working to resolve the
issues concerning the requested grading of the site. Staff stated they were requesting
the item be deferred to the May 6, 2004, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant
additional time to resolve any outstanding issues.
There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent
agenda for deferral to the May 6, 2004, Public Hearing. The motion was approved by a
vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had requested a
revision to the original application. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of
the applicant’s request to revoke the existing PCD zoning for Lot 1 of the Bowman
Kanis Retail Center Subdivision. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of
the applicant’s requested revision to the Bowman Kanis Retail Center Subdivision
Preliminary Plat subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E
and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the
applicant’s requested variance from the Subdivision Ordinance for the Bowman Kanis
Retail Center Subdivision Preliminary Plat to allow the creation of a lot without public
street frontage and staff presented a recommendation of approval of the applicant’s
request to allow an off-premise sign to serve Lot 6 of the Bowman Kanis Retail Center
Subdivision.
Staff presented as a part of their recommendation additional conditions related to the
site development. Staff stated a demonstration must be made that construction of the
first building site was imminent as required by the ordinance before a grading permit
would be issued. Staff stated all haul routes and off-site areas must be approved by
Public Works prior to construction. Staff stated if required by the ordinance, separate
grading permits would be required for off-site fill areas. Staff stated the Master Street
Plan improvements to Bowman Road and Kanis Road must be completed in
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: O (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-B
9
conjunction with the site grading. Staff stated upon completion of grading, all disturbed
areas would be required to be seeded and all slopes, terraces and buffer area
landscaping would be required to be installed as required by the various ordinances.
There was no further discussion of the site. A motion was made to place the item for
inclusion in the Consent Agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-643-B
NAME: Whispering Pines Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Castle Valley Road – West of Chicot Road
DEVELOPER:
Jay Hobbs
14716 Royal Oaks Drive
Little Rock, AR 72210
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 12.75 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 46 FT. NEW STREET: 1,750 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West
CENSUS TRACT: 41.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat for a larger area than
the proposed project on October 14, 1986. The plan included development of the
subdivision in two phases and the Lakeview Country Club golf course. Construction
work of the Phase I portion (the area currently being considered for preliminary platting)
was begun, with roadbeds being prepared and some of the underground utilities
installed. The golf course greens were constructed and are part of the Lakeview
Country Club golf course. Work was discontinued, however, and has since remained
dormant.
In March 1996, a request to re-certify the previously approved preliminary plat was
requested and but later withdrawn. The project involved the subdivision of 69.7 acres
with 88 single-family lots and the construction of 4,370 feet of new internal street. The
applicant requested two waivers: 1) a waiver from the requirement to construct
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-643-B
2
sidewalks along streets, explaining that sidewalks were not required in the original
approval; and 2) a waiver from the requirement to construct storm water detention
facilities shown on the plat in the golf course fairways, explaining that the fairways were
located outside the plat area. As stated the applicant requested the item be withdrawn
from consideration prior to final action by the Planning Commission.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now requesting the approval of the first phase of the previously
approved development or the subdivision of this 12.748-acre site into 46 single-
family lots. The lots will be accessed by Castle Valley Road and two new
residential streets; Whispering Pines Trail and Whispering Pine. The applicant
has indicated the average lot size will be 70-feet by 120-feet or 8,400 square
feet. The applicant has indicated detention will be provided on the fairways of
the golf course as was previously approved and is requesting a variance to allow
off-site detention.
The previously approved preliminary plat included the development of two
phases. The applicant is requesting approval of the first phase only with this
preliminary plat. Once development plans are finalized the developer will
request a review and approval of the proposed second phase.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Site development was begun in 1986, following Planning Commission approval
of a preliminary plat. Street rights-of-way were cleared, roadbeds prepared,
curbs constructed, and water and storm water drain lines were installed for the
Phase I development (at the streets shown on the plat as Whispering Pine and
Whispering Pine Trail) prior to work ceasing. Two fairways associated with the
golf course for the Lakeview Country Club were constructed. The boundary
street, Castle Valley Road is “chip seal” asphalt with “open ditches”, which do not
meet current City street standards.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All
abutting property owners and Southwest Little Rock Untied for Progress were
notified of the public hearing.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-643-B
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Provide design of streets conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct
one-half street improvement to Castle Valley Road (to a collector standard)
including sidewalk. Construct Whispering Pine and Whispering Pine Trail to
residential street standard with sidewalk on one side of the street.
2. Plans of all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to
start of doing any work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in
the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick
Bergfield).
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29 (c) and (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and
drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of
construction.
4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
5. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required
by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code of ordinances. Contact Traffic
Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpot) for additional information
regarding street light requirements.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available in the area. Developer shall be responsible to
verify all lots have proper service and easements are dedicated for all existing
sewer mains. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for
additional information.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
SBC: Approved as submitted.
Central Arkansas Water: Water mains have been installed but were cut and
plugged in 1987. They will have to be chlorinated again and pass sterilization
prior to being put back in service. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438
for additional details.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional information.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-643-B
4
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 15, 2004)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed development indicating a preliminary plat was
approved for the site several years prior and was never final platted. Staff stated
the previous developer had constructed a portion of the required infrastructure
but final improvements were never completed.
Commissioner Adcock requested Mr. McGetrick verify the proposed subdivision
name. Mr. McGetrick stated he would contact Public Works staff to verify the
proposed street names and proposed subdivision name was available.
Staff discussed the indicated right-of-way for Castle Valley Road and the
proposed street design. Staff stated the indicated right-of-way would classify the
street as a collector street per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated the street was
indicated as a residential street on the Master Street Plan and would only require
a 50-foot right-of-way. Mr. McGetrick stated he had indicted a 60-foot right-of-
way because he felt the previous approval included a 60-foot roadway. Mr.
McGetrick stated he would verify the previous approval and indicate the roadway
accordingly.
Staff questioned the proposed storm water detention facility. Mr. McGetrick
stated the applicant was requesting off site detention. He stated the detention
facilities had been constructed in the golf course fairway during the previous
development. He stated the developer’s desire was to maintain this as the
required detention.
Staff noted comments from various other reporting agencies. Staff suggested
the applicant contact them individually for additional information. There was no
further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-643-B
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the April 15, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated the proposed subdivision name is available as well as the proposed
street names.
The applicant has indicated Castle Valley Road with a sixty-foot right-of-way and
36-foot of pavement width. The proposed roadway is more than adequate to
meet the Master Street Plan standard, which requires a fifty-foot right-of-way in
this area. The applicant will construct the roadway to a collector street standard
to allow for sufficient pavement widths to ensure ease in circulation. The
developer has also indicated required improvements to the east will also be
constructed in the same manner when preliminary platting is requested for this
area. The applicant has also indicated a 30-foot front building line on the lots
adjacent to Castle Valley Road; sufficient to meet the minimum required front
building line per the Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant has indicated off-site detention to be located in an existing basin
on the golf course fairway. This request will require a variance to allow the
detention to be located off-site. Staff is supportive of this request. The previous
approval included the required detention to be located in the indicated area and
was constructed as the golf course was being developed.
Per Section 31-94 “a preliminary plat approved by the Planning Commission
shall be effective and binding for two (2) years from the date of approval, or as
long as work is actively progressing, at the end of which time the final plat …
must have been submitted …. Any plat not receiving final approval within the
period of time set forth herein shall be null and void, and the developer shall be
required to submit a new plat of the property for preliminary approval subject to
all zoning restrictions.” Because the project was abandoned for an extended
period of time, submission of a new preliminary plat, conforming to the current
regulations, is required.
Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The proposed subdivision meets the
minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance with regard to lot area size,
lot width and depth and proposed street design. The developer is requesting the
renewal of a previously approved preliminary plat to complete development of a
proposed but abandoned subdivision. As indicated a large majority of the
infrastructure was put in place previously and the developer is requesting to
continue the subdivision to allow the use of the installed water and sewer
connections. The applicant has indicated sidewalks will be constructed as a
part of final platting.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-643-B
6
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels if the proposed plat meets the intent of the
Subdivision Ordinance and the requested variance should have minimal to no
adverse impact on adjoining properties.
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 variance to allow off-site detention.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the
request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the above report.
There was no further discussion of the site. A motion was made to place the item for
inclusion in the Consent Agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-7618
Owner: Dickerson Day Care Family Home –
Special Use Permit
Location: 6 Rosemoor Drive
Applicant: Carmesha Dickerson
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 6 Rosemoor Drive.
A. Public Notification:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Geyer Springs, Wakefield,
Upper Baseline and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.
B. Staff Analysis:
6 Rosemoor Drive is located on the west side of Rosemoor Drive, north of
Greenfield Drive (north of Gum Springs Road). All surrounding properties
are zoned R-2 and contain single family residences. There is a small lake
located on the west side (rear) of the property. Benny Craig Park is
located east and north of the subdivision.
The applicant’s home is a one-story brick and frame structure, and is
typical of those in the general area. The rear yard is fenced and should
provide a safe play area. The applicant proposes to operate the day care
from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The applicant has
noted that she will have one (1) employee, as required by the State
Department of Human Services.
There is a one-car concrete driveway from Rosemoor Drive, with parking
for two (2) vehicles. On inspection of the site, staff observed one (1)
vehicle parked on the grass along the south side of the driveway. The
applicant has noted plans to widen the driveway to a two-car drive by the
end of May, 2004. After widening, staff feels that the driveway will allow
sufficient space for drop-off and pick-up of children. Staff observed no
vehicles on the site which were not operational.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7618
2
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 in the process of becoming licensed by the
State. The day care use is not yet in operation. The applicant submitted
a copy of the Bill of Assurance for this neighborhood, which was recorded
in 1963 and appears to still be in effect. The Bill of Assurance contains
the following language:
“1. No lot shall be used except for residential purposes. No
building shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to
remain on any lot other than one single family dwelling not to
exceed two 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
follow:
1. This use may be located only in a single family home, occupied by the
care giver.
2. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of
Arkansas. State regulations shall control the number of employees
residing off premises.
3. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers.
4. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from
households other than the care givers.
5. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care
centers are not allowed by right.
The following additional site and location criteria were approved by the
Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the Board of Directors on
March 16, 2004:
a. This use may be located only in a single-family home, occupied by the
caregiver and which is the full time residence of the caregiver.
b. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will
be approved for a day care family proposed to be located within 300
feet of an operating day care family home for which a Special Use
Permit has previously been approved. For the purposes of this
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7618
3
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.
c. All day care family homes located in the City of Little Rock are required
to obtain a City of Little Rock business license and to pay an annual
business tax as specified in Chapter 17. of the Code.
d. A copy of the day care family home’s current State of Arkansas license
must be submitted to the City Collector’s Office each year at the time
of payment of the annual business tax.
e. All vehicles must be parked on a paved surface.
f. All vehicles located on the site must be operational.
g. All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the property’s driveway
and not on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the
Planning Commission.
h. Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed by
staff every three (3) years for compliance with the development criteria
and Planning Commission approval.
i. The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed
day care family home.
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 knows of
no permitted/licensed day care family homes or day care centers within
300 feet (or 750 feet) of the site.
C. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Carmesha Dickerson was present, representing the application. Staff
briefly described the proposed day care use.
Staff noted that there was one (1) vehicle parked on the grass next to
the driveway when the property was inspected on April 16, 2004.
Ms. Dickerson noted that she had plans to extend the driveway to a
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7618
4
two-car drive, by the end of May, 2004. The issue was briefly discussed.
In response to a question from the Committee, Ms. Dickerson noted that
she has lived on the property for six (6) years. She also noted that she
expected the majority of the children she will care for to be from the
neighborhood.
After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for final action.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care
family home at 6 Rosemoor Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section
36-54(e)(3).
2. Compliance with the additional site and location criteria as approved
by the Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the Board of
Directors on March 16, 2004.
3. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
4. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to
day-light hours.
5. The driveway must be widened to a two-car drive by the end of
May, 2004.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Carmesha Dickerson was present, representing the application. There was one
(1) person present in opposition and two (2) persons present in support. Staff
presented the application with a recommendation of approval.
Troy Laha addressed the Commission in opposition. He referred to the Bill of
Assurance for the neighborhood, noting that it allowed no commercial uses. He
stated that he observed children on the property recently and noted that the day
care use appeared to be operating. Mr. Laha asked if the requirement to park on
paved surfaces (for approved day care family homes) applied whether or not the
day care use was in operation. Staff noted if a day care family home were
approved, one of the conditions would be no parking on unpaved surfaces. Staff
felt that it would apply any time, before, during or after the approved hours of
operation.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7618
5
Carmesha Dickerson addressed the Commission in support of the application.
She explained that the driveway would be widened to a two-car driveway by the
end of May, 2004. She noted that she will only own two (2) vehicles, and that
one of them will not be on the site during the day care operating hours.
Betty Snyder, of the Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association, addressed the
Commission in support of the application. She noted that the association voted
to recommend approval of the special use permit. She stated that she did have
some concerns with the proposed day care use.
Edna Whitehead also addressed the Commission in support of the application.
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The
motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes and 1 nay. The application was approved.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-7619
Owner: Watkins Day Care Family Home –
Special Use Permit
Location: 7716 Burnelle Drive
Applicant: Desi M. Watkins
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 7716 Burnelle Drive.
A. Public Notification:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the West Baseline, Chicot and
SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of
the public hearing.
B. Staff Analysis:
7716 Burnelle Drive is located on the north side of Burnelle Drive,
approximately 500 feet west of Chicot Road. All surrounding properties
are zoned R-2 and contain single family residences. There is a mixture of
uses and zoning to the southeast along Chicot Road.
The applicant’s home is a one-story brick and frame structure, and is
typical of those in the general area. The rear yard is fenced and should
provide a safe play area. The applicant proposes to operate the day care
from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The applicant has
noted that she will have one (1) employee, her daughter, who also lives on
the property.
There is a one-car concrete driveway from Burnelle Drive, with parking for
three (3) vehicles (including a one-car carport). On inspection of the site,
staff observed one (1) car parked on a gravel area along the east side of
the driveway. The applicant has noted plans to widen the driveway to a
two-car drive by the end of June, 2004. After widening, staff feels that the
driveway will provide adequate space for drop-off and pick-up of children.
Staff observed no vehicles on the site which were not operational.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7619
2
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 in the process of becoming licensed by the
State Department of Human Services. The day care use is not yet in
operation. The applicant submitted a copy of the Bill of Assurance for this
neighborhood, which was recorded in 1961 and appears to still be in
effect. The Bill of Assurance contains the following language:
“(3) LAND USE AND BUILDING TYPE. No lot shall be
used except for residential purposes. No building of any type
shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain on any
lot other than one detached, single family dwelling, not to
exceed two and one-half (2 ½) stories in height.”
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
follow:
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.
The following additional site and location criteria were approved by the
Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the Board of Directors on
March 16, 2004:
a. This use may be located only in a single-family home, occupied by the
caregiver and which is the full time residence of the caregiver.
b. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will
be approved for a day care family proposed to be located within 300
feet of an operating day care family home for which a Special Use
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7619
3
Permit has previously been approved. 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.
c. All day care family homes located in the City of Little Rock are required
to obtain a City of Little Rock business license and to pay an annual
business tax as specified in Chapter 17. of the Code.
d. A copy of the day care family home’s current State of Arkansas license
must be submitted to the City Collector’s Office each year at the time
of payment of the annual business tax.
e. All vehicles must be parked on a paved surface.
f. All vehicles located on the site must be operational.
g. All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the property’s driveway
and not on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the
Planning Commission.
h. Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed by
staff every three (3) years for compliance with the development criteria
and Planning Commission approval.
i. The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed
day care family home.
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 knows of
no permitted/licensed day care family homes or day care centers within
300 feet (or 750 feet) of the site.
C. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Desi Watkins was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief
description of the day care use.
Staff noted that there was one (1) vehicle parked on the gravel next to the
driveway when the property was inspected on April 6, 2004. Ms. Watkins
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7619
4
noted that she had plans to enlarge the driveway to a two-car drive, by the
end of June, 2004. The issue was briefly discussed.
In response to a question from staff, Ms. Watkins noted that the hours of
operation would be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for final action.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care
family home at 7716 Burnelle Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section
36-54(e)(3).
2. Compliance with the additional site and location criteria as approved
by the Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the Board of
Directors on March 16, 2004.
3. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
4. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to
day-light hours.
5. The driveway must be widened to a two-car drive by the end of
June, 2004.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Desi Watkins was present, representing the application. There were two (2)
persons present in opposition and one (1) present in support. Staff presented
the application with a recommendation of approval.
Commissioner Floyd indicated that the church at the southwest corner of Chicot
Road and Woodhaven Drive (within 300 feet of the property) might contain a day
care use.
Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, noted that staff’s records (based on
information supplied by the State Department of Human Services) indicated no
day care use on the church property. He stated that he would not want the issue
to proceed without this issue being resolved. He noted that the application could
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7619
5
be deferred to allow staff time to determine if a day care use existed on the
church property. The issue was briefly discussed. There was additional
discussion regarding approving the application with a condition that there be no
licensed day care use within 300 feet. The Commission determined to proceed
with the application.
Desi Watkins addressed the Commission in support of the application.
Commissioner Adcock asked Ms. Watkins if she owned the property. Ms.
Watkins stated that she rented the house, and that she had permission from the
property owner to file the application.
Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in support of the application.
Jane Harrison spoke in opposition on behalf of the West Baseline Neighborhood
Association.
Troy Laha also addressed the Commission in opposition.
There was a motion to approve the special use permit as recommended by staff.
The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes and 1 nay. The application was
approved.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-7620
Owner: Bubar Family Care Facility –
Special Use Permit
Location: 3712 High Drive
Applicant: Dennis Bubar
Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow for
the operation of a Family Care Facility on the
R-4 zoned property located at 3712 High Drive.
A. Public Notification:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the South End, MLK and
South End Neighborhood Developers Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the public hearing.
B. Staff Analysis:
Dennis Bubar, owner of the single family residence located at 3712 High
Drive, is requesting a special use permit to allow for the operation of a
Family Care Facility at that address. All of the adjacent properties are
zoned R-4, with the exception of the lot immediately to the north which is
zoned I-3, and is undeveloped. There is additional I-3 zoned property
further to the north and east, with PR zoning further west and south.
There are single family residences located to the north, south and east.
The property is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family
residence, with four (4) bedrooms. The applicant is requesting a special
use permit in order to provide a residence for four (4) to six (6) individuals
who have a mental disability and may also have a substance abuse
problem. The residents are involved in a program, where treatment and
services are provided by Gain, Inc. A letter provided by Gain, Inc. notes
that they have “determined that these individuals are stable and able to
live in the community.” The goal in housing is to have the client be as
independent as possible, without putting themselves at risk for
destabilization, and a housing situation that is more structural and
supportive provides them this opportunity.” Copies of the letters
submitted by Dennis Bubar and Dr. Les Smith, Medical Director of Gain,
Inc., are attached for Planning Commission review.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7620
2
The City of Little Rock Zoning Ordinance defines a Family Care Facility as
follows:
“Family care facility means a facility which provides resident
service in a family-like environment to six (6) or fewer
individuals and not more than two (2) staff personnel. These
individuals require a minimal level of supervision and are
provided service and supervision in accordance with their
individual needs.”
Section 36-54(a) of the Zoning Ordinance provides the purpose of
requiring a Special Use Permit for this type of use, as follows:
“General purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide
a method of control over certain types of land uses which,
while not requiring the full review process of the conditional
use permits, do require some review procedure which allows
for determination of their appropriateness within the
neighborhood for which they are proposed and for public
comment.”
Section 36-54(e)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the site and
location criteria for Family Care Facilities as follows:
a. This use may be located only in a single family home.
b. Medical or counseling needs must be provided off-site.
c. No physical changes in the residence are permitted which would
provide other than sleeping accommodations.
d. Drives and parking shall not exceed that required by ordinance for
a single-family residence.
e. This use shall not be permitted to run with the title to the land and
not be transferable.
f. The number and spacing of existing similar facilities in the
neighborhood.
g. Existing zoning and land use patterns.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7620
3
h. Area wide availability of facilities providing like services.
i. Provision for readily accessible public or quasi-public
transportation.
The following additional site and location criteria was approved by the
Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the Board of Directors on
March 16, 2004:
“The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the
proposed family care facility.”
To staff’s knowledge, there have been no special use permits issued for
other Family Care Facilities in this neighborhood. Additionally, staff knows
of no facilities providing this type of resident care in the immediate area.
The site is located near CATA Bus Route #11 (M. L. King, Jr. Route),
which runs south along M. L. King Drive to West 34th Street.
The applicant submitted a copy of the Bill of Assurance for this
neighborhood as part of the application process. The Bill of Assurance
was recorded in 1955 and appears to still be in effect. It contains the
following language:
“(1) LAND USE AND BUILDING TYPE. No lot shall
be used except for residential purposes. No building
shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain
on any lot other than one detached single family dwelling
not to exceed 2 stories in height and a private garage or
carport for not more than two cars.”
Staff believes the proposal to be reasonable and supports the applicant’s
request for a special use permit. Subject to compliance with the site and
location criteria, as noted above, Staff does not believe the level of activity
generated by a Family Care Facility at this location would have any
negative impact on the neighborhood. Special Use Permits are not
transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be transferred from owner to
owner, location to location or use to use.
C. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Dennis Bubar was present, representing the application. Staff briefly
described the proposed family care facility.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7620
4
Dennis Bubar explained that the individuals who will live in the residence
have mental disabilities, and some may also have drug or alcohol abuse
problems. He noted that they do not have physical disabilities. In
response to a question from staff, he noted that there would be no
physical changes to the residence. Mr. Bubar also noted that none of the
clients owned vehicles, therefore no additional parking was needed.
Mr. Bubar explained that the individuals who live on the site will be picked
up by Gain, Inc. each day between 8:00 and 8:30 a.m., and returned to
the residence between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m. He noted that counseling and
treatment services are provided at the Gain, Inc. offices. He also noted
that a doctor or counselor employed by Gain, Inc. will stop by the
residence each day to inspect the premises. In response to a question
from the Committee, Mr. Bubar noted that a few of the residents might
have a part-time job.
After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for final action.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a Family
Care Facility at 3712 High Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section
36-54(e)(2).
2. Compliance with the additional site and location criteria as approved
by the Planning Commission on February 12, 2004 and the Board of
Directors on March 16, 2004.
3. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
4. The Special Use Permit will be for Dennis Bubar only, and will not be
transferable in any manner.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, informed the Commission that the application
needed to be deferred to the June 17, 2004 agenda to allow staff time to
research the Fair Housing Act with respect to this application. There were
several persons present in opposition. They were informed of the deferral date.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7620
5
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the June 17, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-7621
Owner: Lester Minick and George Nordman
Applicant: Bob Minick
Location: 2203/2225 Barrow Road
Area: Approximately 10 acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to O-3
Purpose: Future Office Development
Existing Use: Two (2) Single Family Residences
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Undeveloped property; zoned O-3 and C-3
South – Parkview High School campus; zoned R-2
East – Single family residences and undeveloped property; zoned R-2
West – Single family residences, beauty shop and Central Arkansas Library
branch (under construction); zoned R-4, O-3 and PD-O
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Barrow Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be
required with the proposed zoning action.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The property is not located on a CATA Bus Route. Bus Route #14
(Rosedale Route) runs along West 36th Street to the south.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the John Barrow and
Brownwood Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
public hearing.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7621
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District. The Land Use
Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for O-3
General Office for an office development.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan. The plan has several objectives, which
recommend adding more business opportunities in the area. The plan
specifically recommends more medical related offices to locate in the
northern portion of the study area where the applicant’s property is
located.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Lester Minick and George Nordman, owners of two (2) five acre tracts at
2203/2225 Barrow Road, are requesting to rezone the property from “R-2”
Single Family District to “O-3” General Office District. The rezoning is
proposed for future office development of the property.
There are currently two (2) one-story frame single family residences
located within the west one-quarter of the property. The east three-
quarters of the property is undeveloped and mostly wooded. There are
two (2) driveways from Barrow Road which access the residences.
This general area along Barrow Road contains a mixture of zoning and
uses. There is undeveloped O-3 and C-3 zoned property immediately
north of the site, with single family residences further north. The Parkview
High School campus is located to the south. Single family residences and
undeveloped R-2 and R-4 zoned properties are located to the east. A
beauty shop and single family residences are located across Barrow Road
to the west. A Central Arkansas Library branch is being developed to the
northwest, with a nursing home facility located to the southwest.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as office. The
proposed O-3 zoning does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested O-3 zoning. Staff feels that future
development of this property for an office or office park is reasonable. An
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7621
3
office development on this property should prove to be compatible with
the surrounding uses and zoning. The Future Land Use Plan shows office
extending north from the Parkview High School campus to the single
family homes along Howell Drive and Keltwood Cove. The proposed O-3
zoning should have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the
general area.
As noted previously, there are single family residences immediately east
of the site. When the property to the north was rezoned, a 50 foot wide
OS strip was zoned along the property’s east boundary, where adjacent to
residential property. Staff feels that it would be appropriate to also
provide a 50 foot wide OS zoned buffer along the east property line of this
10 acres, where adjacent to single family property.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested O-3 zoning, subject to
zoning the east 50 feet of the property “OS” Open Space.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-7622
Owner: L. A. Kinnaman
Applicant: Christopher Barrier
Location: 15617 Chenal Parkway
Area: 5.673 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Purpose: Future Commercial Development
Existing Use: Vacant office building and storage yard
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Undeveloped property (across Chenal Parkway);
zoned C-2
South – Plant Nursery (across Kanis Road); zoned PCD
East – Undeveloped property; zoned O-2
West – One Source Home Center; zoned PCD
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Chenal Parkway is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. At this location, right-of-way is adequate except where a
property pin extends to the shoulder. An additional 20’ is required at
this point, tapered back to other corners.
2. The Master Street Plan calls for a new leg of Kanis Road to be
constructed from Chenal Parkway south along the western boundary
of the property. The new street then turns east in a long radius to
meet the existing Kanis Road alignment at the Rock Creek Bridge.
Dedicate right-of-way for this street radius as shown in the 1998 Kanis
Road Concept Study.
3. Any future construction or development of the property would be
subject to Master Street Plan improvements.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7622
2
4. In accordance with Section 31-176, floodway areas must be shown as
floodway easements or be dedicated to the public. In addition, a 25-
foot wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway
boundary.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Parkway Place and St.
Charles Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Commercial and Park/Open Space for this property. The
applicant has applied for C-3 General Commercial for future commercial
development.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. If a future
commercial development of the property includes open display or outside
uses, the specifics of the site plan should be reviewed to assure the
compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding uses.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek
Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and Commercial Development
goal seeks to maintain the residential integrity of the neighborhood with
the objective of adhering to the Future Land Use Plan and lists an action
statement of requiring developments in the neighborhood to adhere to the
Future Land Use Plan.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
L. A. Kinnamon, owner of the 5.673 acre property located at 15617
Chenal Parkway, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single
Family District to “C-3” General Commercial District. The rezoning is
proposed for future commercial development of the property.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7622
3
The property currently contains a vacant office building and construction
yard, formerly occupied by Kinco Construction Company. There is an old
residential structure which is located within the south one-half of the
property. There is a paved access drive from Chenal Parkway, with
paved parking along the east side of the office building. There is also a
gravel access drive from Kanis Road, leading to the residential structure.
The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. The One Source
Home Center development is located immediately west, with undeveloped
C-3 zoned property and the Kroger PCD development further west. There
is undeveloped O-2 zoned property to the east, with single family
residences further east. Undeveloped C-2 zoned property is located
across Chenal Parkway to the north. A plant nursery, single family
residences on large lot and undeveloped R-2 zoned property is located to
the south across Kanis Road.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial
and Park/Open Space (floodway area). The proposed C-3 zoning does
not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
A fairly large portion of the property (almost the entire east one-half of the
property) is located in the floodway for Rock Creek, as the creek runs
north/south through the property near the east property line. Staff
recommends that the area of the property within the floodway be zoned
“OS” Open Space. Additionally, the Public Works Department requires
that the floodway be dedicated as an easement, with a 25 foot wide
access easement adjacent to the floodway boundary.
Additionally, Public Works requires that right-of-way for a future leg of
Kanis Road be dedicated within the southwest portion of the property.
See the Public Works Comments (comment 2.) in paragraph A. of this
report for a description of the right-of-way to be dedicated.
Staff is supportive of the rezoning request. As noted previously, the
property is shown as commercial on the City’s Future Land Use Plan.
After the required floodway and right-of-way dedications, staff estimates
that approximately two (2) acres will remain as developable property.
Staff feels that a small retail-type commercial development at this location
will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties or the general
area.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7622
4
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 zoning, subject to the
following conditions.
1. The portion of the property located within the floodway must be zoned
“OS” Open Space.
2. Compliance with the Public Works requirements as noted in paragraph
A. of the staff report.
STAFF UPDATE:
On April 20, 2004, the applicant asked that this item be deferred to the June 17,
2004 Agenda. The applicant is working with the Public Works department on the
design of the new leg of Kanis Road which will run along the west property line.
The applicant has expressed interest in filing a Master Street Plan Amendment
for a different design, which would also be placed on the June 17, 2004 Agenda.
Staff supports the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the June 17, 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 June 17, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: LU04-19-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Chenal Planning District
Location: Southeast and Southwest corner of Cantrell Rd. and Chalamont Dr.
Request: Single Family to Commercial
Source: Brian Dale, White - Daters & Associates, Inc.
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District from Single Family to
Commercial. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and
wholesales sales of products, personal and professional services, and general
business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on
the trade area that they serve. The applicant wishes to develop the property for
commercial uses.
Staff is not expanding the application since there is undeveloped land shown as
Commercial located along Cantrell Road at the Chenal Parkway intersections
and at the Ferndale Cutoff Road intersection.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The applicant’s property consists of two pieces of vacant land along the south
side of Cantrell Road at Chalamont Drive currently zoned R-2 Single Family with
3.8 acres ± east of Chalamont, and 5.7 acres ± west of Chalamont for a total
area of about 9.5 acres ± in size. All of the surrounding property is zoned R-2. A
vacant non-conforming car repair garage sits on the north side of the Cantrell /
Chalamont intersection. The Robinson Elementary, Middle and High schools are
located to the east of the application area. The property to the west along
Cantrell Road consists of single-family housing built on large lots. Further to the
west of the application area a dirt hauling business occupies a Planned
Development - Industrial, which lies on both sides of Cantrell Road. The land to
the south of the study area is largely vacant. However, a subdivision of single-
family houses is in the process of developing and expanding towards the
applicant’s property along Chalamont Drive. This area was preliminary platted
on the October 15, 1998 planning commission agenda.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-19-02
2
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On February 17, 2004, multiple changes were made from Single Family,
Multifamily, and Office to Office, Park Open / Space, Commercial, and
Multifamily along Chenal Parkway north of Cantrell Road starting about 1 mile
east of the applicant’s property to accommodate proposed development.
On December 2, 2003, a change was made from Low Density Residential to
Commercial on the southwest corner of Ferndale Cutoff and Highway 10 about 1
mile to the west for proposed commercial development.
On January 2, 2002, A change was made from Single Family to Commercial,
Suburban Office, and Park / Open Space near the Southeast corner of Chenal
Parkway and Cantrell Road starting a little over one mile east of the application
area to accommodate proposed development.
On March 6, 2001 a change was made from Single Family to Commercial in the
19,900 block of Highway 10 about 2/3 of a mile to the east of the amendment
area to accommodate proposed development.
The applicant’s property and all of the surrounding land is shown as Single
Family except for the Robinson schools, which are shown as Public Institutional.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and built
as a rural two-lane road. At the area fronting the schools, Cantrell Road
provides an additional center turn lane. Chalamont Drive and Morgan Cemetery
Road are shown as Collector Streets. Chalamont Drive is built to Master Street
Plan standards. Morgan Cemetery Road is built as a rural road with open
drainage. A Class II Bikeway is shown on Cantrell Road from Ferndale Cutoff
Road to Chenonceau Boulevard. Class II Bikeways do not require any additional
Right of Way or paving and would be subject to any half street improvements
made by the applicant. The applicant may be responsible for half street
improvements along Cantrell Road.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 includes public school
facilities within the Eight-block strategy of providing park and open space
facilities within an eight-block walking distance of all City of Little Rock residents.
The Robinson schools, which are east of the application area, are included in the
plan’s Eight-block strategy. Additional park facilities may need to be developed
in the future to serve a broader group of citizens.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-19-02
3
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
The east boundary of this amendment area is located about 1 mile to the west of
the developing commercial node at the Chenal / Cantrell intersection. Cantrell
Road / Highway 10 has been planned utilizing commercial nodes that are distinct
and separate. Most of the Commercial nodes on Cantrell Road are located at
intersections with Principal and Minor Arterials. The applicant’s property is
located at an intersection with a Collector Street and a Principal Arterial. This
action would add a commercial node in an area that has been shown as Single
Family. The applicant has not shown a need to add Commercial to the plan in
an area where Commercial has not been shown before. Staff has concerns that
the length to depth ratio of the property in questions might result in strip
commercial development rather than node commercial development.
The potential for this area to develop as a Commercial node is limited by the
presence of the schools that are located immediately to the east. Conflicts can
arise between the intense uses of Commercial and schools. The location of the
applicant’s property near the schools may cause traffic conflicts from both the
loading and unloading of students and the commercial traffic throughout the day.
At this location, there are three schools, a high school, a middle school and an
elementary school. A change to Commercial may encourage developments that
generate large volumes of traffic originating from a large market area. Any
potential increase in traffic at this location may be incompatible with the
neighboring Public Institutional uses.
If Commercial was approved for this location, the close proximity of the two
collectors (Morgan Cemetery Road and Chalamont Drive) that intersect Cantrell
may encourage pressure for future non-residential development in the
amendment area. The location of a collector intersecting an arterial in itself does
not necessitate Commercial being shown on the land Use Plan.
The Commercial development that is occurring nearest the applicant’s property
is located about a mile to the east at the Chenal / Cantrell intersection. The
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-19-02
4
Chenal / Cantrell Commercial node contains land available for non-residential
development that is not yet developed to its full potential. About 110.5 + acres of
land shown as Commercial is located at the Chenal / Cantrell intersection with
about 30.2 + acres being developed and about 80.3 + acres remaining
undeveloped. The applicant’s property is also located to the east of the Cantrell
/ Ferndale Cutoff intersection. The 21.06 + acres of Commercial shown at the
Cantrell / Ferndale intersection is between a Principal Arterial and a Minor
Arterial. The applicant’s property is about halfway between the Chenal / Cantrell
Commercial node and the Cantrell / Ferndale Cutoff intersection. Some changes
have just occurred to the east at the Chenal Parkway and Highway 10 existing
Commercial node. The changes include adding additional Commercial areas to
areas of Commercial that are still vacant. With vacant Commercial land lying
both to the east and to the west in existing commercial nodes, it is difficult to
justify adding an additional commercial node.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Aberdeen Court
Property Owners Association, Bayonne Place Property Owners Association,
Carriage Creek Property Owners Association, Chenal Ridge Property, Du
Quesne Place P.O.A., Eagle Pointe Property Owners Association, Glen Eagles
Property Owners Association, Hillsborough Property Owners Association,
Hunters Cove Property Owners Association, Hunters Green Property Owners
Association, Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, Marlowe Manor
Property Owners Association, Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, St
Charles Property Owners Association, Charleston Heights/North Rahling Rd
N.A., and Margeaux Place Property Owners Association. Staff has received no
comments from area residents at the time of writing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. Staff believes that it is not
appropriate to create another commercial node along this stretch of Cantrell and
have concerns on commercial activities abutting the school property.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 17, 2004
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier the by-laws for
a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That
motion was made and approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent.
A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7.1 FILE NO.: Z-7623
Owner: Deltic Timber Corporation
Applicant: White-Daters and Associates
Location: Southeast and southwest corners of Cantrell
Road and Chalamont Drive
Area: 11.77 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-3 and OS
Purpose: Future Commercial Development
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Single family residences on large lots and auto repair business
(across Cantrell Road); zoned R-2
South – Undeveloped property (approved residential preliminary plat);
zoned R-2
East – Joe T. Robinson High School; zoned R-2
West – Single family residences on large lots and commercial building;
zoned R-2 and PD-I
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Highway 10 is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline at all
locations will be required. Note: According to map scale, the area
west of Chalamont is deficient. Boundary Street improvements are
required with future development.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the DuQuesne Place
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7623
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use
Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for
C -3 General Commercial for commercial development.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate
item on this agenda.
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:
Deltic Timber Corporation, owner of the 11.77 acre property located at the
southeast and southwest corners of Cantrell Road and Chalamont Drive,
is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family District to
“C-3” General Commercial District and “OS” Open Space District. The
rezoning is proposed for future commercial development of the property.
The property is currently undeveloped and wooded.
The general area along Cantrell Road contains a mixture of uses. There
is an auto repair business and single family homes across Cantrell Road
to the north, with Joe T. Robinson Elementary School located to the
northeast. Joe T. Robinson Junior and Senior High School campus is
located to the east. There are single family residences and a commercial
building to the west along Cantrell Road. There is undeveloped R-2
zoned property to the south. A preliminary plat has been approved for this
area to the south for phases of the Chalamont residential subdivision.
The applicant proposes to rezone 4.08 acres at the southeast corner of
Cantrell Road and Chalamont Drive from R-2 to C-3. The applicant is
proposing to zone a 50 foot wide strip (0.80 acre) along its south
boundary to OS. The applicant also proposes to rezone 5.73 acres at the
southwest corner of the intersection from R-2 to C-3, with a 50 foot wide
strip (1.16 acres) along its south boundary.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates the property as Single
Family. The applicant has filed a Land Use Plan Amendment for a
change to Commercial, which is a separate item on this agenda (Item 7.).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7623
3
Staff does not support the requested C-3 zoning. Staff does not feel that
there is currently a need for additional commercial zoned property in this
general area. There is a large amount of undeveloped commercial zoned
property to the east, at the intersection of Cantrell Road and Chenal
Parkway, and to the west at the intersection of Cantrell Road and
Ferndale Cut-Off. Both of these intersections are arterial/arterial
intersections. The intersection of Cantrell Road and Chalamont Drive is
an arterial/collector intersection. The Highway 10 Plan establishes
commercial nodes at specific locations along the highway. This request
does not adhere to that plan. Staff feels that C-3 zoning for the properties
at the southeast and southwest corners of Cantrell Road and Chalamont
Drive is premature at this time. Staff feels that the applicant should
possibly look at other options for the property.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be deferred to the June 17, 2004 agenda. Staff supported
the deferral request.
With a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays, the Commission voted to waive their bylaws
and accept the applicant’s request for deferral, 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 June 17, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: LU04-22-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - West Fourche Planning District
Location: Southwest corner of Col. Glenn and Marsh Road
Request: Single Family to Office
Source: Robert Harp, c/o McGetrick & McGetrick
The applicant has requested a deferral to the June 3, 2004 agenda. Staff
supports this deferral request so that it may coincide with an amended zoning
application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 3, 2004
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent
agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8.1 FILE NO.: Z-7624
Owner: Robert S. Harp
Applicant: McGetrick and McGetrick (Pat McGetrick)
Location: Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and
Marsh Road
Area: 5 acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to O-3
Purpose: Office Use
Existing Use: Single Family Residential
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Single family residences on large lots, auto repair
business and beauty shop; zoned R-2 and C-3
South – Single family residences on large lots and undeveloped
property, zoned R-2
East – Single family residences; zoned MF-6 and R-2
West – Single family residences on large lots; zoned R-2
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on April 21, 2004 requesting that the
application be withdrawn. The applicant notes that the application will be refiled
as a PD-O rezoning, as the applicant proposes to use the existing house on the
property as an office. Staff supports the withdrawal request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the application be withdrawn. Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for withdrawal. A motion to that effect was made. The motion
passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The application was withdrawn.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: LU04-11-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-430 Planning District
Location: 11524 W. 36th Street
Request: Mixed Use to Mixed Office Commercial
Source: Kenneth Davis, c/o McGetrick & McGetrick
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment located in the I-430 Planning District from Mixed
Use to Office. The Office category represents services provided directly to
consumers (e.g. legal, financial, medical) as well as general offices, which
support more basic economic activities. The applicant wishes to convert a
residential property into an office. On April 22, 2004, Staff received a letter to
modify the application for a change to Mixed Office Commercial.
Prompted by this Land Use Plan Amendment request, the Planning Staff
expanded the area of review to the neighboring house to the east. This
expansion will include all of the area on the north side of W. 36th Street west of I-
430 bounded on the east and west by the property owned by the Church at Rock
Creek.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is a house currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is located on a lot
of about 1.93 acres ± in size. The expanded area includes a house on a large
lot zoned R-2, which abuts the applicant’s property on the east. The neighboring
land to the west along W. 36th Street consists of vacant land at the northeast
corner of W. 36th and Bowman. A large tract of vacant land zoned Planned
Office Development wraps around the applicant’s property from the west to the
north and is the future site for the Church at Rock Creek, and borders I-430 on
the east. The eastern portion of the church property is currently being cleared at
the east entrance from W. 36th Street next to I-430 and construction has started.
A vacant tract of land zoned MF-12 is located southeast of the application area
at the southwest corner of W. 36th and I-430. The remainder of the land to the
south is zoned R-2 and is developed with single-family housing built on large
lots.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-02
2
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On November 18, 2003 a change was made from Mixed Office Commercial to
Service Trades District along Old Shackelford Road about a ½ mile east of the
applicant’s property to accommodate proposed development and recognize
existing conditions.
On October 21, 2003 a change was made from Office to Commercial in the Col.
Glenn & I-430 area about 1 mile south of the study area to accommodate
proposed development.
On February 4, 2003 a change was made from Multifamily to Mixed Office
Commercial on the southwest corner of I-430 and W. 36th Street about 1/10 of a
mile to the south and east of the application area to accommodate proposed
development.
On January 7, 2003 a change was made from Office to Commercial at 12201
Col. Glenn Road about 1 mile southwest of the applicant’s property to
accommodate proposed development.
On January 16, 2001 changes were made from Mixed Use to Commercial, and
Suburban Office to Office, on the southeast corner of I-430 and Col. Glenn Road
about 2/3 of a mile southeast of the amendment area to accommodate proposed
development.
On September 19, 2000 a change was made from Mixed Office Commercial and
Low Density Residential to Mixed Use on the northeast corner of W. 36th Street
and Bowman Road, including the current amendment study area, to
accommodate proposed development.
The expanded amendment area, and all of the property to the west, north, and
east is shown as Mixed Use. The south side of W. 36th Street is shown as Mixed
Office Commercial and is bisected by a strip of Park/Open Space shown along
the floodway of Brodie Creek. A large area of Suburban Office is shown on the
west side of the Bowman Road / W. 36th Street intersection.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
W. 36th Street is shown as Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan. The plan
also describes a modified right-of-way along this portion of W. 36th Street of 80
feet to accommodate four lanes of traffic and five lanes at major intersections.
A Class III Bikeway is shown on W. 36th Street from Bowman Road to Rock
Creek. A Class III Bikeway does not require any additional right-of-way or
paving. Any development of the applicant’s property will need to be designed in
such a way as to consider the traffic impact on W. 36th Street and the
accompanying bikeway and be subject to half street improvements.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-02
3
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 show the floodway of
Brodie Creek as a Potential Greenbelt. This Potential Greenbelt serves as an
area that may be used for either recreational uses, and or open space
opportunities. The amendment area is not immediately adjacent to Brodie Creek
and not likely to have a direct impact on the Potential Greenbelt.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
Although Office is not shown in the vicinity of the application area, office
developments are allowed in the areas shown as Mixed Use, Mixed Office
Commercial, and Suburban Office. Mixed Use and Suburban Office require a
Planned Zoning District for office uses but MOC which does not require a PZD if
the use is entirely office. This application would allow the development of offices
in the amendment area without a PZD.
Since most of the surrounding property is shown as Mixed Use, and non-
residential uses are in the very early stages of development surrounding the
application area, the future viability of residential uses on the north side of W.
36th Street becomes questionable. However, the property on the south side of
the street will face similar pressure to develop for non-residential uses, especially
at the intersection of W. 36th and Bowman. The nearby Suburban Office, and
MOC do not encourage future residential development in the neighborhood.
Removing Mixed Use does remove the possibility of residential development in
this area. There is still a large amount of Mixed Use (approximately 41 acres) to
the north and west of the application area that could be developed for residential
uses.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Neighborhood
Connections, SW Little Rock UP, WCLR Coalition of Neighborhoods, Birchwood
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-11-02
4
Neighborhood Association, Campus Place Property Owners Association,
Kensington Place Property Owners Association, Pennbrook/Clover Hill Property
Owners Association, Sandpiper Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "A"
Neighborhood Association, Twin Lakes "B" Special Improvement District, Twin
Lakes B Prop. Owners Association, and Westbrook Neighborhood Association.
Staff has received no comments from area residents at the time of writing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 17, 2004
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent
agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9.1 FILE NO.: Z-7625
Owner: Kenneth Davis
Applicant: McGetrick and McGetrick (Pat McGetrick)
Location: 11524 West 36th Street
Area: 1.93 acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to O-3
Purpose: Future Office Development
Existing Use: Single Family Residential
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Undeveloped (future church at Rock Creek site); zoned POD
South – Single family residences on large lots and undeveloped
property (across West 36th Street); zoned R-2, MF-12, OS
and C-2
East – Church at Rock Creek facilities (under development); zoned POD
West – Undeveloped and one (1) single family residence; zoned R-2
and POD
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. West 36th Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be
required with the proposed zoning action.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. Route #14 (Rosedale
Route) is located to the east along Shackleford Road and West 36th
Street.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the John Barrow and
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7625
2
Sandpiper Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has applied for O-3
General Office for an office development.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Office is a separate item on
this agenda.
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:
Kenneth Davis, owner of the 1.93 acre property located at 11524 West
36th Street, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family
District to “O-3” General Office District. The rezoning is proposed to allow
future office development of the property.
The property currently contains two (2) single family residences (one-story
frame structures). Residential drives from West 36th Street serve the
property.
The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. The approved
Church at Rock Creek POD development is located immediately north
and east of the property. The church is nearing completion of the first
building of its multi-phase development, located at the southeast corner of
the property. There is one (1) single family residence located to the west,
with additional residences on large lots located to the south across West
36th Street. There is also undeveloped R-2, MF-12, O-2 and C-2 zoned
property in the immediate area. Interstate 430 is located approximately
700 feet to the east.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Mixed Use.
The applicant has filed a Land Use Plan Amendment for a change to
Office (Item 9. on this agenda). Staff is supporting an amendment to
Mixed Office Commercial, which will support the proposed O-3 zoning.
Staff is supportive of the rezoning. Staff feels that an office development
on this property will fit in well with the projected future development of this
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7625
3
area along West 36th Street, west of I-430. The Church at Rock Creek
POD development, which will contain a variety of church and ancillary
church uses wraps around this property to the north, east and west. The
property across West 36th Street to the south is designated as Mixed
Office Commercial on the City’s Future Land Use Plan. Staff feels that a
O-3 office development on this property will have no adverse impact on
the surrounding properties or the general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested O-3 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff informed the Commission that the application needed to be deferred to the
June 17, 2004 agenda based on the fact that the applicant failed to complete the
notification to surrounding property owners as required.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the June 17, 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-2722-B
NAME: Martinez Grocery Wholesale –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 6500 S. University Avenue
OWNER/APPLICANT: Eduardo Martinez
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow use of
the existing facilities on this C-4 zoned property for a
retail grocery store and a wholesale grocery
operation.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the southwest corner of S. University Avenue
and West 65th Street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located on the intensely developed S. University Avenue
corridor. This area contains a variety of enclosed and open display
commercial uses. To the east, across University Avenue, the zoning is
primarily industrial and the uses become industrial in nature. This site
does have a rear yard relationship to an area of R-2 zoned single family
properties. No outdoor storage is proposed and no changes to the
building or parking areas are contemplated. This enclosed use should be
more compatible with the neighborhood than the previous open display
use was.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Meadowcliff, S.
Brookwood, Geyer Springs and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood
Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The building contains approximately 16,000 square feet. The retail
grocery store is proposed to occupy 5,000 square feet; requiring 16
parking spaces. The remaining 11,000 square feet will be used for the
wholesale operation and will require 18 parking spaces. The site has
sufficient asphalt paved parking in front and on the side of the building. A
loading dock is located at the rear of the building. No changes are
proposed to the existing driveways or parking areas.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2722-B
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
If the rehabilitation of this structure exceeds 50% of the current
replacement cost of the structure, then the vehicular landscaping
requirements must be upgraded accordingly.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. No comments on proposed use change for existing building.
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: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met.
Central Arkansas Water record does not indicate that there is a water
service to this building. Contact the water utility regarding water
service.
A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges.
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: CATA bus routes are located on University Avenue and Mabelvale
Pike, both adjacent to this site.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2722-B
3
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Eduardo Martinez and Jerry Meyer were present representing the application.
Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding
signage, days and hours of operation, number of employees and the dumpster
location. Staff noted the 1964 Bill of Assurance did not address use issues.
Staff asked the applicant to note any areas for outside storage, if any were
proposed. Staff also noted a neighborhood resident had complained about loud
music coming from a concession truck that occasionally parked on the site. Staff
advised the applicant to contact the utility companies about their specific
comments, particularly Central Arkansas Water.
The applicant stated he proposed to make no changes to the site other than to
paint the building and to remove an outdoor boat lift. He stated he would
address the issue of the concession vehicle and would contact the water utility.
Landscape and Public Works Comments were noted.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by April 21, 2004. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A conditional use permit is requested to allow for use of the existing building on
the C-4 zoned property located at 6500 S. University Avenue as a grocery
wholesale business and a retail grocery store. The site is occupied by a 16,000
square foot commercial building. Areas of paved parking are located in front and
on both sides of the building. Access to the site is from both S. University
Avenue and 65th Street. The applicant proposes to use 11,000 square feet of
the building for the grocery wholesale operation. The applicant proposes to
supply groceries to small stores that cater primarily to the Hispanic population.
Five thousand (5,000) square feet of the building will be used for a retail grocery
store.
Hours of operation will be seven days a week, from 7:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. The
business will initially employ 4 persons, but will expand to 10 persons. Signage
will consist of ground-mounted signs on the 65th Street and University Avenue
frontages and wall signs on the building. All signage will conform to ordinance
standards for commercial zones. A dumpster will be located on the north side of
the building and will be screened to meet ordinance requirements. No outdoor
storage will be utilized. An existing metal shed near the rear of the site will be
used for storage of maintenance items (lawnmowers, etc…). A catering truck
occasionally parks on the site, selling prepared food items. Complaints have
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2722-B
4
been received regarding loud music associated with this truck. The applicant
has stated outdoor music will be discontinued. The 1964 bill of assurance does
not address use issues.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit. The proposed use is
compatible with uses and zoning in the area. The site was formerly occupied by
a boat sales and service company, with outside display and storage of boats and
equipment. This proposed, enclosed retail and wholesale use should actually be
more compatible with the nearby residential neighborhood than the previous use
was.
On April 21, 2004, the applicant submitted responses to staff issues raised at
Subdivision Committee. Those responses are reflected in the above analysis.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends compliance with the conditional use permit application subject
to compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5
and 6 of the staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent and 1 recusing (Meyer).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-3371-J
NAME: Trane Warehouse – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: Colonel Glenn Plaza Drive at Bowman Plaza
OWNER/APPLICANT: Robert Vogel/White-Daters and Associates
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a new office warehouse with retail
sales on this vacant, 5.83, C-3 zoned tract.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located southwest of the Colonel Glenn – I-430
Interchange; east of the Rave Theater.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within a large, commercial node established
around the Colonel Glenn – I-430 interchange. This tract is one of several
undeveloped tracts within the commercial subdivision at the southwest
corner of that interchange. A multi-screen theater is located west of the
site. An automobile sales lot is located several hundred feet north of the
site. The I-430 right-of-way is adjacent to the east and undeveloped, C-3
zoned property is adjacent to the south. The proposed use is compatible
with uses and zoning in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR United for Progress
and John Barrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the site is via two driveways off of Colonel Glen Plaza Drive.
Ninety-nine (99) parking spaces will be located in parking lots located on
the north and east sides of the building. A driveway will circle around the
site, providing access to the truck docks located at the rear of the building.
A 60,000 square foot warehouse facility requires 100 parking spaces.
With the 99 spaces on the front and side, and the large paved area at the
rear of the building, there is sufficient parking on the site.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-J
2
A 30-foot perimeter planting strip is required adjacent to Interstate 430.
Currently, the plan shows only 20-feet which also consists of a keystone
retaining wall. This is a requirement of both the zoning and landscaping
ordinances.
An automatic irrigation system is required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in
the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Sidewalks with appropriate
handicap ramps are required in accordance with Sec. 31-175 of the
Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan.
2. As designed, the southern-most driveway creates a left turn hazard
with the driveway to the west. Align this driveway with the driveway to
the west.
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Final
site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and
approved prior to the start of construction.
4. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required with the plan
submittal per Section 29-186(e). Show a sketch of proposed final
contours and all drainage facilities.
5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. If
covered by an approved regional detention plan, provide plan showing
compliance.
6. Driveway location must be consistent with any shared driveway
locations as shown on the preliminary plat.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-J
3
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met.
A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges.
This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered
connections off the private fire system.
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: A fire hydrant may be required. Contact Fire
Department.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Tim Daters was present representing the application. Staff presented the item
and noted additional information was needed regarding building height and
design, signage, number of employees, site lighting, fencing, dumpster location
and the specific mix of uses. Staff asked for details on the proposed retaining
walls and the treatment of the landscape areas shown at each corner of the site;
particularly adjacent to I-430. Staff asked if an HVAC company would operate
from the site or if it would strictly be a wholesale supply company. Mr. Daters
stated he would provide answers to staff’s questions.
Landscape and Public Works Comments were discussed. Staff noted the
landscape and zoning ordinance requirement for a 30 foot buffer adjacent to the
interstate. Staff noted that the proposed buffer was only 20 feet in width and
was bisected by a retaining wall. Public Works Staff noted concerns about
driveway locations and asked Mr. Daters to show the driveways as approved with
the preliminary plat and to eliminate a turning movement conflict with the theater
driveway.
Mr. Daters was advised to respond to staff issues by April 21, 2004. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-J
4
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Trane proposes to construct a 60,000 square foot office warehouse on the C-3
and C-4 zoned, 5.83± acre tract located just east of the Rave Theater, at Colonel
Glenn Plaza and Bowman Plaza. Approximately 10,500 square feet of the
building will contain offices, conference rooms and training centers.
Approximately 2,850 square feet will be used for counter parts sales. The
remaining 46,650± square feet will be used for warehousing of parts and
supplies.
The site will contain 99 parking spaces and a large truck parking area. Access is
from two driveways off of Colonel Glenn Plaza Drive. The applicant has
relocated one of the driveways to line up with the theater driveway across the
street, as required by Public Works. The building will be constructed of colored
concrete tilt-up walls with a standing seam, metal roof. The building height will
be 35 feet. Days and hours of operation are proposed as Monday through
Saturday, 6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. The business will employ 15-18 persons. All
site lighting will be shielded downward and into the site. Signage will consist of
wall signs on the front and side facades and a single ground-mounted sign on
the Colonel Glenn Plaza frontage. All signs will conform to ordinance standards
for commercial zones. No HVAC Service Company will operate from the site. In
addition to wholesale, retail and warehouse operations, the building will contain a
training center where classes may be held on installation and service of
equipment. Keystone segmental block retaining walls will be located near the
north and east perimeters of the site. The retaining wall on the north is 12 feet in
height at its highest point. The retaining wall on the east is 14 feet tall at the
highest point. Areas are shown at each of the 4 corners of the site where
existing trees will remain. The required 30 foot landscaped buffer will be
installed along the interstate frontage, as required by the buffer and landscape
ordinances.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit. The site is located in
the commercial node established by the Colonel Glenn/I-430 Interchange.
Although much of the commercial property immediately around the site is still
undeveloped, the proposed use is compatible with zoning and uses in the area.
On April 21, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised site plan and responses to
staff issues raised at Subdivision Committee. Those responses are reflected in
the analysis above. The site is within the Colonel Glenn Commercial Subdivision
and there is no bill of assurance issue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance
with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the
staff report.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-J
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-3442-J
NAME: Wal-Mart – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 8801 Baseline Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc./Jason Mans, Store Manager
PROPOSAL: A revised conditional use permit is requested to allow
for an expansion of the area in the parking lot that is
devoted to outdoor – seasonal display. The property
is zoned C-3 and I-2.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
A representative of the Wal-Mart Store was present. Staff presented the item
and asked the applicant to provide information on the treatment of the perimeter
of the display area (barricade, fencing, signage). Staff presented a history of the
seasonal display area. Commissioner Adcock voiced concerns about traffic
congestion around the display area and the number of revisions to its conditional
use permit that Wal-Mart had requested. The applicant stated signage could be
placed along the driveways in the vicinity of the display area to help direct traffic.
It was noted that there were no Public Works or Landscape Comments.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by April 21, 2004. The
Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A 199,140 square foot Wal-Mart Supercenter is located on the 21+ acre lot at
8801 Baseline Road. The site also contains an 849 space parking lot. The
southern portion of the site, where the building and a portion of the parking lot
are located, is zoned I-2. The northern portion of the lot, containing the
remainder of the parking lot and detention areas, is zoned C-3.
A conditional use permit was first approved in February 1992 to allow
construction of the Wal-Mart. The conditional use permit was revised September
1992 to allow an expansion for food sales. In November 1992, the conditional
use permit was further revised, eliminating the proposed expansion and making
some other changes to the site plan. In August 1997, after the store was built,
the conditional use permit was revised to allow an area of outdoor-seasonal
sales in an area encompassing 30 parking spaces for a period of 120 days each
year and to allow for the use of trailers behind the building for seasonal layaway
storage. In April 1998, the conditional use permit was revised to allow the
expansion into a Supercenter. There was no change in the outdoor-seasonal
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3442-J
2
display or trailer storage. In April 1999, the conditional use permit was revised to
allow the outdoor-seasonal sales area to be expanded to encompass 40 parking
spaces and to allow sidewalk merchandise display. The approval was for 150
days each year and allowed the outdoor display area to be equal to 105% of the
building’s façade area. There was no change in the 120 days each year
approved for use of the layaway trailers. On April 3, 2003, the conditional use
permit was revised to allow the area of outdoor-seasonal sales to be 258 days
each year, January 1 through September 15. No expansion of the outdoor-
seasonal sales area was proposed and no change was proposed in the 120 days
per year for the layaway trailers. The outdoor-seasonal sales was to remain in
the location previously approved; on the sidewalk and in the parking lot near the
building’s northwest corner. No tents or other structures were to be erected in
conjunction with the outdoor-seasonal sales. On March 25, 2004, the
Commission approved a revision to the conditional use permit allowing for
construction of two glazed canopies in the area at the northwest corner of the
store to be utilized for garden center sales during seasonal months and overflow
storage during holiday months. The revision also included the construction of a
chainlink/shade cloth outdoor garden center directly in front of the store, on a
sidewalk area adjacent to the garden center.
During the review for the most recent revision, staff was made aware that Wal-
Mart had expanded the area of parking lot, outdoor-seasonal display across a
driveway, onto an additional 16 parking spaces. Wal-Mart was issued a notice
for the violation and subsequently filed for this revised C.U.P. No change is
proposed to the allowable 258 days each year for outdoor-seasonal display.
Staff is not supportive of the requested additional outdoor-seasonal display area.
The previously approved display area is located in an off-set of the parking lot,
outside of the main customer parking and driveway area. As proposed, the
display area crosses a driveway and is located in the main parking lot, in the
vicinity of one of the two entrances at the front of the store. Loading of
merchandise in the new area will likely impact the driveways on either side of the
display, further compounding traffic circulation problems in the area. The
Commission’s March 25, 2004 action allowed for the expansion of permanent
garden-seasonal display directly adjacent to the store.
There is no bill of assurance issue. The area of the outdoor-seasonal display is
to be enclosed by a low fence constructed of cinder blocks and landscape
timbers. Wal-Mart has stated they will erect signage to help guide customers
through the parking lot around the display area.
The West Baseline and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations,
all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents within
300 feet who could be identified were notified of this request.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3442-J
3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were several objectors present. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of denial.
Willie Sawyer representing the Wal-Mart Store, stated Wal-Mart had transferred
some of its merchandise off of the lot and had cancelled some future deliveries
of merchandise. He stated there was congestion on the site due to a
construction project and good weather bringing many customers to the seasonal
display area. Mr. Sawyer stated there really was not a traffic problem on the site
and the parking lot was not full other than the period from Thanksgiving through
Christmas.
Janet Berry, of SWLR United for Progress, stated the West Baseline
Neighborhood Association had voted to oppose the application. She stated the
store was very busy and there was much traffic on the site. Ms. Berry stated the
store appeared not to care about the community. She stated the landscaping
was dying and the parking lot was dirty. Ms. Berry stated many area residents
drove by the store to shop at Wal-Mart in Bryant.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, stated she was concerned about the
numerous times the original Conditional Use Permit had been amended. She
stated the outdoor display area could be unsightly and leave a negative
impression.
Mr. Sawyer responded that Wal-Mart’s Associates take pride in their store and
attempt to meet their customers’ needs and shopping demands.
Commissioner Floyd stated this Wal-Mart used to be a good neighbor but
something happened.
Commissioner Lowry asked why the Commission should believe Wal-Mart is
going to live within this proposed area when the store has previously not lived
within the allotted space. Mr. Sawyer stated he could not speak for previous
management but the store would commit to complying with the Commission’s
action.
A motion was made to approve the application, as filed. The motion failed with a
vote of 1 aye, 10 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-4384-D
NAME: Curves for Women – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 13420 Otter Creek Parkway, Suites 5 and 6
OWNER/APPLICANT: Woodcliff Industries, Inc., C. O. Circle K/
Greystone/Susan Marshall, Applicant
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a
women’s fitness and weight loss center (health
studio or spa ) to locate in two lease spaces within
the existing building on this C-1 zoned property.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the northwest corner of Otter Creek Parkway
and Stagecoach Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The applicant proposes to occupy two lease spaces within this existing
building. No changes will be made to the site. The property is located
within the commercial node established around the Otter Creek
Parkway/Otter Creek Road/Stagecoach Road Intersection. Several other
commercial uses are located within the building, including a convenience
store with gas pumps. A multi-tenant shopping center is located across
the street to the south. Platted, but undeveloped, C-1 zoned properties
are located to the north. A utility substation is located across Stagecoach
to the east and additional C-1 properties are to the west. The proposed
use is compatible with uses and zoning in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Otter Creek and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the site is via a driveway off of Stagecoach Road and two
driveways off of Otter Creek Parkway. A parking lot is located between
the building and Otter Creek Parkway. There is also parking around the
gas pump island. The building has 8 lease spaces. The tenants include
the EZ Mart convenience store, a take-out only pizza shop, EZ Mart
corporate office, a beauty salon, an insurance office and Curves. One
space is empty and Curves proposes to expand into a second space.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4384-D
2
There is sufficient parking space on the site to accommodate the uses.
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: No objection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Susan Marshall and Kay Matthews were present representing the application.
Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding
signage, days and hours of operation and the number of employees. It was
noted that there were no Public Works or Landscape Comments since no
changes were being proposed to the site.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to
the full Commission. The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by
April 21, 2004.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4384-D
3
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The C-1 zoned property located at 13420 Otter Creek Parkway is occupied by a
small, commercial strip center with 8 lease spaces. The lease spaces are
occupied by a variety of uses including a convenience store, a take-out pizza
shop, a beauty salon and offices. One space is occupied by the applicant
“Curves for Women”, a fitness and weight loss center. The site contains an
asphalt paved parking lot.
On August 1, 1999, the applicant commenced operating the business in lease
space No. 5. On January 7, 2004, perhaps after the applicant applied for a
privilege license, she was informed the use was not permitted in C-1. The
applicant subsequently applied for a conditional use permit to allow the use. She
has also made arrangements to expand the business into the adjoining lease
space No. 6. Hours of operation are proposed as Monday through Friday, 6:00
a.m. – 7:00 p.m. and Saturday, 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Including the applicant,
there are five employees. Signage consists of a wall sign and space on the
tenant, ground sign.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit. The use is
compatible with uses and zoning in the area. There is sufficient parking on the
site to accommodate the use. The days and hours of operation are consistent
with other commercial uses in the vicinity. No changes to the site are proposed,
other than interior remodeling to allow the proposed expansion. The 1985 bill of
assurance is still valid and does not address use issues. On April 21, 2004, the
applicant responded to issues raised at Subdivision Committee and reflected in
the analysis above.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the application, as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval, as filed. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
NAME: Second Presbyterian Church –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 600 Pleasant Valley Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT: Second Presbyterian Church/The Holloway Firm
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a building for youth services and
activities on this existing, R-2 zoned, 8.6± acre tract.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of Cantrell Road, between
Pleasant Valley Drive and Interstate 430.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The proposal is to construct an additional building on the existing church
site. No expansion of the church property is proposed. The church
property is located at the northern edge of a large residential
neighborhood. The site is buffered from the single family residences by
multifamily developments on the east and south, Interstate 430 on the
west and Cantrell Road on the north. The church is a compatible use for
this location. Allowing the addition of the proposed building should not
affect the church’s continued compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the River Ridge and Pleasant
Valley Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the site is via two driveways off of Pleasant Valley Drive. The
site currently has 375 parking spaces. The sanctuary of the church has
seating for 580 persons and the assembly area of the new building will
seat 50 persons. At a ratio of one parking space for every 4 seats, a
maximum of 157 parking spaces are required. No changes to the
driveways or parking area proposed.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinance is required.
The proposed structure encroaches into the required 36-foot wide land
use buffer area along the southern perimeter of the site.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Additional credit toward
fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when properly
preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or larger. Preserved trees must be
protected with temporary fencing placed out to the trees dripline. Special
attention to the existing parkway corridor along Pleasant Valley Drive
would be appreciated to maintain the park like setting.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in
the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Sidewalk construction with
appropriate handicap ramps would normally be required.
2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site
grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved
prior to the start of construction.
3. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. The project
may qualify for a contribution in-lieu of construction at the time of the
building permit.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: CenterPoint has a 4” steel main in the area. Any
required relocation is the responsibility of the applicant.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
3
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met.
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
This development will have minor impact on the existing water
distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure
and fire protection.
Fire Department: A fire hydrant may be required. Contact Fire
Department for placement.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: A CATA bus route is located on Pleasant Valley Drive.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed on building height and design, signage, hours of use,
lighting, fencing, use of the outdoor patio area, number of parking spaces and
the seating capacity in the church. Staff asked that a copy of the bill of
assurance be provided. Staff asked if thought had been given to either adding
on to the existing building to locating the proposed new building elsewhere on
the site. The applicant responded that all options were considered and this
proposal was arrived at because it did not involve the loss of parking spaces or
excessive grading. The applicant stated the trees would be preserved between
the proposed building and the adjacent Cambridge Place Condominium
development.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were presented and discussed. The
applicant was advised that the structure encroached on the required land use
buffer along the south perimeter. Utility comments were noted. The applicant
was advised to contact the individual utilities, if there were questions.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
4
The applicant was advised to meet with the neighbors. He responded that one
meeting had already taken place. The applicant was advised to respond to staff
issues by April 21, 2004. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned, 8.6± acre tract located at 600 Pleasant Valley Drive is currently
occupied by the facilities of Second Presbyterian Church. The church is
requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for construction of a new
building on the site to accommodate services and meetings for youth. No
changes are proposed to the existing driveways or parking areas. The new
building will be located on a undeveloped area at the southeast corner of the
site.
The distance slope across the building site is 12 feet. Therefore, the south
elevation of the new building will show one floor and the north elevation will show
two floors. The highest point of the roof is 30 ft. 8-inches with the skylight being
36 feet 8-inches above the first floor. The main roof is a pyramid shape with
composition fiberglass shingles that will blend with the existing church roof. In
an effort to mitigate the impact of the structure on adjacent properties, a
substantial portion of the roof has been eliminated using a flat roof instead. A
new ground mounted sign will be placed adjacent to the driveway, north of the
building. The sign will be 3 feet tall and 2 feet by 3.5 feet in area. It is
anticipated that the building will be used for youth activities on Sundays from
9:30 a.m. through 8:30 p.m. and from 3:00 p.m. – 8:30 p.m., Monday through
Saturday. Activities will include Sunday School, bible study, youth group
meetings and school tutoring programs. On Sunday evenings during the school
year and on Wednesdays during the summer, the youth get together for dinner
and social activities between 6:00 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. The director of youth
ministries and other adults will supervise all activities.
The existing site lighting on the parking lot adjacent and to the west is on the
north side and the fixtures are shielded downward. Any future area-wide exterior
lighting would be likewise. The only exterior lighting on the proposed building
would be under the covered porch and around the patio. No uplighting on the
exterior of the building is proposed. No new fencing is anticipated with the new
development. Currently, there is a shadowbox fence located on the south
boundary of the church property, separating it from the adjacent Cambridge
Place development. Chainlink fencing is located along the church’s north and
west perimeter, where adjacent to the Interstate and Hwy. 10 right-of-way. The
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
5
proposed patio area will be used as a gathering place in good weather and for
small group discussion and learning, under adult supervision. The property has
never been platted so there is no bill of assurance. A fire hydrant will be
installed.
On April 22, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised site plan and responses to
issues raised at Subdivision Committee. Those responses are reflected in the
analysis above.
The applicant did consider locating the building elsewhere on the site. It was
determined that locating the building at this location would be most feasible.
Locating the building elsewhere would cause significant grading problems
requiring extensive retaining walls and would likely cause the loss of parking
spaces. Expansion of the existing church building would cause intrusion into
other activity areas.
The Zoning Ordinance requires a 36-foot buffer on the south side of the church
property, where it is adjacent to Cambridge Place. The site plan has been
modified to provide a 32-foot buffer between the new building and the south
property line. The new building will require the removal of 9 trees out of the 36
existing in this area. Additional trees of large caliper will be placed in the south
buffer area. The building has been slightly reduced in size to provide the
additional buffer depth.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit. The applicant has
done a good job of responding to issues raised by staff and has attempted to
mitigate the impact of the new development on adjacent properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5
and 6 of the staff report.
2. No amplified music is to be played on the patio.
Staff recommends approval of a variance to allow the reduced buffer on the
south side of 32 feet subject to additional plantings of larger caliper trees as
proposed by the applicant.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
6
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were several objectors present. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance
with the conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above.
Linda K. Smith, representing the church, stated the church agreed to all staff
comments and conditions. She asked those present in support of the application
to raise their hands. Several persons responded. Ms. Smith stated the church
had been at this location for 36 years.
Marie Dugan, of 104 Cambridge Place Drive, spoke in opposition to the item.
She stated a Conditional Use Permit should be used to enhance a
neighborhood, not harm it. She questioned why the church wanted to move its
young people away from the church and nearer the neighbors. She made note
of two other locations on the site that she felt were better suited for the new
building. Ms. Dugan stated she felt the location was chosen to provide higher
visibility for the church. She voiced concerns about trash, noise and the loss of
trees. Ms. Dugan stated activities in and around the youth building would not be
compatible with the neighbors. She pointed out several problems on the site;
including over-lighting, poor dumpster maintenance, noise and a decrepit garage
building. She urged the Commission to make the church choose an alternate
site.
Commissioner Allen asked Ms. Dugan what she meant by youth activities not
being compatible with the neighborhood. Ms. Dugan responded that many of the
neighbors were older and retired. Commissioner Allen asked what she meant by
“less than desirable activities”, Ms. Dugan responded that she was referring to
youth activities in close proximity to older residents.
Commissioner Rector noted that Ms. Dugan had made reference to “late-night
activities”. He stated the staff report noted activities would cease at 8:30 p.m.
Ms. Dugan responded that there would be informal congregating on the patio
area after hours.
Blake Hendrix, a resident of Cambridge Place, spoke in opposition. He also
voiced concern about having youth activities in close proximity to elderly
neighbors. He also suggested that the building could be located elsewhere on
the site.
In response to a question from Chairman Rahman, Mr. Hendrix stated there was
a 6 foot tall, “shadow box” fence between the church and the condominiums. He
asked if the item could be deferred for further discussions to take place.
Linda Smith responded that the architect and engineer both agreed that the
proposed location was best. She stated the dumpsters were temporary; in
association with a remodeling project. Ms. Smith stated the church could not
afford to lose any parking spaces. She stated the screening fence was actually
6’8” tall. In response to a question from Commissioner Rector, Ms. Smith stated
there would be no unsupervised use of the patio area.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4670-A
7
Commissioner Rector stated the site needed some cleaning-up. He asked if
the impact of the lighting on the roof of the existing building could be lessened.
The applicant responded that there would be no external lighting on the new
building, other than porch lighting on the north side of the building. Ms. Smith
stated the roof lighting on the existing building could be turned off from midnight
to 5:00 a.m.
In response to a question from Commissioner Taylor, the applicant stated the
building could be reduced or moved to provide the required 36-foot buffer.
After a brief discussion, the applicant amended the application to provide the
required 36-foot buffer and to turn off the roof lighting on the existing church
building from midnight until the following evening each day.
A motion was made to approve the application as amended, including all staff
comments and conditions. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent and 1 recusing (Lowry).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
NAME: Geyer Springs First Baptist Church –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 12,400 I-30
OWNER/APPLICANT: Geyer Springs First Baptist Church/Joe Statton
PROPOSAL: A revision to a previously approved master plan is
requested for the church located on this R-2 zoned
168 acre tract. Approval is requested for placement
of a 20’ X 40’ portable building for administration
space until completion of the administration addition.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the north side of I-30, south of Otter Creek Road
and Stagecoach Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The main campus is located on the south side of the tract. Only 26 acres
of the 168 are useable; the remainder are in the floodway. The floodway
provides a large buffer around the campus buildings and parking lot. The
proposed ballfields are located on the north perimeter of the site, at
Stagecoach Road. This area long Stagecoach is developing as
nonresidential uses, including a recently approved church to the west and
a mini-warehouse development to the north. The proposed church plan is
compatible with uses and zoning in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Otter Creek and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The existing church sanctuary seats 2,000 persons, requiring 500 parking
spaces. No expansion of the sanctuary is proposed. The site has parking
for 1,050 vehicles with an additional 600 parking spaces being proposed.
Access to the main campus is from three driveways off of the interstate
frontage road.
Approximately 100 parking spaces are proposed in conjunction with the
ball fields. Access will be from a single driveway off of Stagecoach Road.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinance is required.
A portion of the proposed parking lot encroaches into the required 30-foot
wide on-site landscape buffer area along Interstate 30. A variance of this
requirement would require the approval of both the City Beautiful and
Planning Commission.
The proposed ball field parking lot does not provide for the required
interior landscaping (8 percent) within the parking lot. Interior islands
must be at least 300 square feet in area and 7 ½-feet in width. This is a
requirement of the landscape ordinance.
A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings are required west of
the proposed area to be developed.
The western land use buffer width must not drip below a width of 9-feet.
The full width requirement without transfers being 50-feet.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements
can be given when properly preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or larger.
Trees to be preserved must be protected to their dripline with protective
fencing.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. The western portion of the proposed parking lot extension appears to
encroach into the regulatory floodway. Contact Public Works, Vince
Floriani (501) 371-4817 for a floodway determination.
2. As proposed, the alteration of the floodway will require flood map
revisions and conditional letter of map revision would be required from
Public Works and the Federal Emergency Management Agency prior
to start of work. An alternative would be to re-design the parking lot.
3. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
3
Section 8-283 prior to construction. This applies to the proposed ball
field and the parking lot.
4. Stagecoach Road at the ball field entrance is classified on the Master
Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet
from centerline will be required.
5. With construction of the ball fields, construct one-half street
improvement to Stagecoach in accordance with the Master Street
Plan.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
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: Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved
reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is
required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be
installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW)
requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the
assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed
by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results
must be sent to CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days of
installation and annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 992-
2431, if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for
this project.
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
This development will have minor impact on the existing water
distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure
and fire protection.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
4
Fire Department: A fire hydrant may be required. Contact Fire
Department.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and asked for more
information regarding building height, signage, phasing, lighting and fencing.
Staff specifically asked if the ball fields would be lighted at night. Staff asked
that a copy of the bill of assurance be provided. Staff informed the Committee
that the church was proposing to place a portable building on the site for use as
office space until the office phase was constructed. In response to a question
from staff, the applicant stated the church did operate a day care center, but no
private school.
Public Works Comments were presented. The applicant was advised to meet
with staff regarding an apparent encroachment of the proposed parking lot into
the floodway.
Landscape Comments were discussed. The applicant was advised to request a
waiver of the screening requirement since the site abutted a floodway. It was
noted that the R-2 property west of the proposed ball fields had recently been
approved for development as a church.
The applicant was advised to contact the individual utilities regarding their
comments and to respond to staff issues by April 21, 2004. The Committee
forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On February 12, 1991, the Commission approved a conditional use permit
allowing for construction of a new church building on this R-2 zoned, 168± acre
tract. The approval included a single, two-story, 42,000 square foot building and
associated parking.
On September 6, 1994, the Commission approved an amendment to the C.U.P.
to allow for the placement of 4 portable classroom buildings on the site. Use of
the portable buildings was to be for a period of 3 years or until permanent
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
5
classroom facilities were constructed, whichever came first.
On July 18, 1996, the Commission approved an amendment to the C.U.P. to
allow for the addition of a day care and kindergarten within the existing building.
The day care/kindergarten was approved to have a maximum enrollment of 200
children. At that time, the entire congregation had not moved from Geyer
Springs to this new facility. The four previously approved portable buildings had
not yet been placed on the property. Development still consisted only of the
initial 42,000 square foot building and the associated parking.
On May 15, 1997, the Commission approved an amendment to the C.U.P.
allowing for the phased expansion of the building and parking. One large,
temporary modular building had been placed on the site adjacent to the church
building. Phase I consisted of a 85,000 square foot, two-story building addition
and additional parking. Phase I was to contain a 2,000 seat sanctuary, offices,
music rehearsal space and classrooms. The large, temporary modular building
was to be removed after the completion of Phase I. Phase II was to consist of a
40,000 square foot, two-story addition and additional parking. Phase II was to
contain a fellowship hall and additional classroom space. Phase I was
completed and the large, temporary modular building was removed.
On January 21, 2000, staff approved the placement of two portable classroom
buildings on the site to be used until September 18, 2000 in anticipation of
beginning the Phase II expansion.
On February 22, 2000, staff approved the placement of two additional portable
classroom buildings, also until September 18, 2000.
On August 22, 2000, staff approved the continued use of the four portable
classroom buildings until September 2001.
On August 27, 2001, staff approved an extension, allowing the four portable
classrooms to remain until September 2002. No additional extensions were
granted and the four portable classroom buildings remain on the site.
On October 30, 2003, the Commission approved the continued use of the four
portable classrooms until October 30, 2005 or until the next phase of
construction, whichever occurs first.
The church recently approached staff about the possibility of placing a fifth
portable building on the site, to be used for administrative space. During the
discussion, staff was made aware that the church was in the process of
preparing a new, long-range development plan. Staff suggested that the church
submit a C.U.P. application for review of the new master plan and temporary use
of the additional portable building.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
6
Under the master plan approved in 1997, the phasing plan was as follows:
Existing Education building 42,000 sq. ft.
Existing Parking 512± spaces
Phase I (sanctuary building) 36,500 sq. ft.
Phase I parking 240± spaces
Phase II (Fellowship hall and classrooms) 36,500 sq. ft.
Phase II parking 350± spaces
Total Building area 163,500 sq. ft.
Total Parking 1,102 spaces
The sanctuary portion of the building was to act as the “core” of the development
with future phases and parking to wrap around that core. The existing facility is
approximately 125,000 square feet with 1,050± parking spaces. The church
property is 168 acres in size but only 26± acres are useable, due to a large
floodway which bisects the site. The useable areas are where the main campus
is located, adjacent to I-30, and a small tract adjacent to Stagecoach Road.
The church’s new master plan is preliminary and long range in nature; however,
the following components are essential to the church’s growth: additional
education space in all areas; additional administration space; Family Life Center;
outdoor picnic and recreation areas; and the remodeling of various areas within
the existing church including the fellowship hall. The exact phasing is conceptual
in both program and square footage. The conceptual master plan incorporates
an additional 600 parking spaces and approximately 175,000 additional square
feet. The new plan would result in a facility some 300,000 square feet in size
with 1,650± parking spaces. The new plan also now incorporates use of the
portion of the site that abuts Stagecoach Road. Two softball fields and a parking
lot are proposed for development in this area.
The preliminary phasing plan is shown on the site plan documents and is
proposed to include the following program:
Phase IA – Preschool, Children and Youth classroom space along with additional
Office space.
Phase IB – Family Life Recreation space with Multi-use spaces.
Phase II – Additional Kitchen space and Remodel of existing Fellowship Hall.
Phase III – Additional Senior Adult and Adult classroom space.
Phase IV – Additional Preschool classroom space and Choir Rehearsal space.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
7
Development of the additional parking will occur as needed and the ball fields
are not indicated as a specific phase. The parking lot associated with the ball
fields will be constructed in conjunction with the ball fields.
The proposed buildings are mainly two stories with the exception of the east
wing. This wing would be three stories with an entrance one-story below the
current ground level of the existing facility. No portions of the new additions will
be higher than the existing structures. The church is not proposing any new
tower or steeple structures. The church currently has one ground-mounted sign
along the frontage road and various small directional signs. No new signage is
planned at this time. Any new signage, including signage for the ball field tract,
will comply with ordinance standards for office and institutional zones. The ball
field lighting has not been designed at this time; however, the intent is to have
the ball fields lighted for evening and nighttime use. Lighting will be focused onto
the fields. The only fencing proposed is around the ball fields and playground
area. Both will be gated.
On April 21, 2004, the applicant submitted responses to issues raised at
Subdivision Committee. Those responses are reflected in the analysis above.
The church will not be building in or altering the floodway. Once the confirmed
floodway is established, the parking lot will be redesigned to avoid the floodway.
The church will comply with all requirements of the landscape and buffer
ordinances with one exception. At staff’s suggestion, the church is requesting a
waiver of the screening fence requirement adjacent to the ball field tract. The
property to the west of that tract has recently been approved for development for
a new church.
The church is requesting approval to add a fifth portable building to the site for
administration space. The intent of Phase IA is to build the classrooms and
offices needed to remove all of the portable buildings upon its completion. Staff
would prefer to tie the timeframes for all portable buildings together.
No changes are proposed in the day care operation and no additional uses are
proposed. The site is not within a subdivision and does not have a bill of
assurance.
Staff is supportive of the revised C.U.P. The applicant has done a good job of
addressing concerns raised by staff. Each specific phase will be reviewed in
detail for compliance with Code requirements at the time it is proposed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the following conditions:
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5365-E
8
1. Compliance with the Comments and Conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and
6 of the staff report.
2. Each specific phase of the development is to be reviewed by staff for
compliance with Code requirements and the approved master plan.
Staff recommends approval of the requested waiver of screening on the west
side of the softball field tract. Staff recommends that use of the fifth portable
building be approved until October 30, 2005, or until the next phase of
construction, whichever occurs first.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended
by staff; including the screening waiver and use of the portable building until
October 30, 2005 or the next phase of construction. The vote was 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-7617
NAME: Dodds Duplex – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 2119 West 17th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Paul Dodds
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
conversion of the vacant, dilapidated single family
structure at 2119 West 17th Street into a duplex.
The property is zoned R-3.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the southeast corner of West 17th Street and
Park Avenue; one block south of Central High School.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The neighborhood contains a variety of residential housing; including
single family, duplex and multifamily. Several of the structures in the area
are vacant and boarded. Central High School is located one block to the
north. The proposed rehabilitation of this vacant structure will be a benefit
to the neighborhood. The proposed duplex use is compatible with uses
and zoning in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Central High and Wright
Avenue Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A duplex requires 3 on-site parking spaces; 1.5 per unit. The site has a
single driveway that is deep enough to stack 4-5 vehicles. The applicant
is requesting a variance to allow the stacked parking arrangement. Staff
is supportive of the variance request. If the stacked parking does not
work out, there is more than adequate space on the site to allow for the
installation of additional parking spaces.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7617
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: No objection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: CATA bus routes are located on 13th Street and Wright Avenue,
located to the north and south of this site.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Paul Dodds, the applicant, was present. Staff presented the item and noted
there were no issues other than the parking variance. Staff informed the
Committee that the 1889 Bill of Assurance did not address use issues. Mr.
Dodds presented photographs of the building, showing its dilapidated condition.
He stated he was proposing to occupy one of the units, either upstairs or
downstairs. There were no other comments.
The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A conditional use permit is requested to allow for conversion of the vacant,
dilapidated residential structure at 2119 West 17th Street into a duplex. The
conversion will be accomplished by building out the attic, which is 8 ft. 3-inches
high at its peak. The front porch and one room downstairs, plus the entire attic,
with approximately 900 square feet of living space, would be devoted to the new
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7617
3
upstairs unit. After build out, the house would be two stories and approximately
2,500 square feet. The owner intends to occupy the first floor unit which would
be around 1,400 square feet. The upstairs, 1,100 square foot unit would be
rented to help defray costs. The owner works internationally and travels
extensively and having someone occupying the structure will provide additional
security. This permit will not change the footprint of the house. Other than
adding two skylights and screening the front porch, there will be no changes to
the 17th Street façade of the house. There will be dormers added along both
sides of the wing which runs parallel to Park Avenue, but there will be no
increase to the height of the house. Windows will be added to existing gables,
matching those in the rest of the house.
The house is currently vacant, having been abandoned after a fire. The new
owner is in the process doing a complete rehabilitation of the structure. The
owner has also acquired the lots directly west of the house. The remnants of a
former structure have been removed from those lots. They will be incorporated
into the applicant’s site as yard space.
Staff is supportive of the request. The rehabilitation of this structure will be of
benefit to the neighborhood. The proposed renovations maintain the historic
nature of the structure, which is important since the site lies within the Central
High Historic District. The proposed duplex use is compatible with uses and
zoning in the area.
Staff supports a variance to allow stacked parking, as proposed by the applicant.
If the parking situation does not work out, there is adequate space on the site to
accommodate additional parking spaces.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the application, as submitted.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There was on objector present. Staff presented the
item and informed the Commission that the applicant and objector had agreed to
defer the item to the June 3, 2004 agenda since the applicant had to leave to
catch an airplane flight. There was no further discussion.
A motion was made to defer the item to the June 3, 2004 agenda. The motion
was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-7626
NAME: Joe T. Robinson School – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 21,501 Cantrell Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Pulaski County Special School District/
White-Daters and Associates
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
addition of a gymnasium, softball field, baseball field
and parking to this existing, R-2 zoned, 68± acre
school site.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of Cantrell Road, 1,000± feet
west of Highway 300. The site is not within the city limits but is in the
City’s extraterritorial jurisdiction.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The school has been at this location for many years and the community is
beginning to build up around it. There currently are no homes directly
adjacent to the area where the ballfields are proposed. A preliminary plat
has been approved south of the school site and eventually single family
homes will be built in this area. The proposed uses are to replace
ballfields and a gymnasium which exists just east of the site so the
concept of having such uses in the neighborhood is nothing new.
Attention must be given to proper screening and buffering of the ballfields
from the developing residential neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the DuQuesne Place and
Pinnacle Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The school site is accessed via three driveways off of Cantrell Road. A
new, 80 space parking lot is proposed to be constructed on the north edge
of the campus, near the new gymnasium. A 10 space parking lot is
proposed near the new baseball field. The new parking lots will take
access off of the existing driveways. No expansion of the classroom
portion of the school is proposed, so no increase in on-site parking is
required. The existing and proposed new parking should be adequate to
serve the proposed uses.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7626
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings are required along
the southern perimeter of the site. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement
can be given for proper preservation of existing vegetation that provides
year-around screening.
An automatic irrigation system is required.
Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements
can be given when properly preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or larger.
Trees to be preserved must be protected to their dripline with protective
fencing.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. This site is outside of the corporate boundary, but within the
extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City. The proposal is to build new
replacement ball fields and parking.
2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in
accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the
Master Street Plan.
3. Provide grading and drainage plans for the proposed construction.
Contours, slope and terrace treatment should conform to the general
requirements of the land alteration ordinance.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Outside service boundary, no comment.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7626
3
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met.
A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the connection(s)
will apply to this project in addition to normal charges.
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: Provide letter of approval from Fire Department which
provides service to this site. (LRFD approved as submitted.)
County Planning: No Comments received.
CATA: The site is located along a CATA express route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
Tim Daters was present representing the application. Staff presented the item
and noted additional information was needed regarding building height and
design, signage, fencing, phasing, site lighting (including the ballfields) and days
and hours of use. Staff asked if the ballfields and gymnasium would be used by
parties other than the school. Staff noted the site was not located in a
subdivision and did not have a bill of assurance.
Public Works Comments were noted. Landscape Comments were discussed.
Staff asked specifically about the buffer on the south side of the proposed
baseball field. Staff commented that it appeared grading of the site would come
close to the south property line. Mr. Daters responded that he would show the
limits of grading and the remaining undisturbed area on a revised site plan.
Utility and Fire Department Comments were noted.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff comments by April 21, 2004. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned, 68± acre tract located at 21,501 Cantrell Road is occupied by
the Joe T. Robinson Junior High and High School campus of the Pulaski County
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7626
4
Special School District. The site contains school buildings, athletic fields and
parking lots. The site is located outside of the Little Rock city limits but within the
City’s extraterritorial jurisdiction.
The District is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the
phased construction of a baseball field, a softball field, a gymnasium and
additional parking. Phase I consists of a baseball field, 10 parking spaces and a
maintenance access drive. Phase II consists of a softball field. Phase III, 2 to 5
years, consists of a gymnasium and an 80-space parking lot. The ballfields and
gymnasium are to replace facilities currently located on a Deltic Timber owned
site adjacent to the east. The ballfields will be fenced and lighted and will
include spectator seating areas. The lighting will be directed onto the fields. The
Phase III gymnasium has not yet been designed by an architect so specifics
about the building materials are not available. The height of the building will be
what is typical for a gymnasium, 45± feet. The gymnasium and Phase III parking
have been placed to conform to Hwy. 10 Overlay Standards for setback and
buffer. The ballfields and gymnasium could conceivably be used seven days a
week from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The facilities will be made available for use
by groups other than the Joe T. Robinson School students.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit. On April 21, 2004,
the applicant submitted a revised site plan, grading plan and responses to staff
issues raised at Subdivision Committee. Those responses are reflected in the
analysis above.
Although the property adjacent to the south is currently undeveloped, a
preliminary plat has been approved for development of that area as a single
family residential subdivision. Staff was concerned about the relationship of the
baseball field to the south property line. The grading plan and site plan show the
limit of clearing to come no closer than 30 feet from the south property line;
leaving an undisturbed, wooded buffer on the south perimeter. The ball field
itself is 100 feet from the property line.
Staff believes the proposed ballfields and gymnasium and parking lot will not
affect the school’s continued compatibility with the neighborhood. The property
is unplatted and not covered by a bill of assurance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit, subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the staff report.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7626
5
2. All site lighting, including ball field lights, are to be directed into the site and
shielded downward as much as possible.
3. All loud speakers are to be directed downward and into the ballfields and
should be shielded in a manner to reduce the amount of the sound beyond
the ballfields.
4. Written approval must be received from the fire department with jurisdiction in
this area prior to issuance of a building permit.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-7627
NAME: Woodlands Edge Subdivision Recreation Facility –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: Woodlands Trail Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT: Rocket Properties, LLC/The Mehlburger Firm
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
development of a private, subdivision recreation area
on this R-2 zoned 5.85± acre tract.
STAFF REPORT:
On April 14, 2004, the applicant submitted a request that this item be deferred to
the June 17, 2004 meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request for deferral to the June 17,
2004 meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had requested that the
item be deferred to the June 17, 2004 agenda. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to June 17, 2004 by a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-7628
NAME: Westover Hills Presbyterian Church –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 6400 Kavanaugh Blvd.
OWNER/APPLICANT: Westover Hills Presbyterian Church/Fennell Purifoy
Hammock Architects
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
redevelopment of this existing church site and
construction of additional parking spaces. The
property is zoned R-2.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the north and south sides of Kavanaugh Blvd., west
of McKinley Street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The church has existed at this site for many years. Although the
predominate land use in the surrounding neighborhood is single family
residential, there are a few other uses in the immediate area; including
apartments and duplexes. The majority of the proposed church project
takes place within the property historically occupied by the church. This
portion of the project should not affect the church’s continued compatibility
with the neighborhood. A new element is the proposed 42 space parking
lot on the south side of Kavanaugh. This too could be compatible with the
neighborhood if attention is given to proper screening and landscaping.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Heights Neighborhood
Association were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The seating capacity in the church’s sanctuary is 240 persons, requiring
48 parking spaces; based on one space per 5 seats for churches built
prior to November 1, 1988. No change in the sanctuary seating capacity
is proposed. The church’s day care center has a maximum enrollment of
100 children with 20 employees, requiring 30 parking spaces under
current ordinance guidelines. The church currently has 72± parking
spaces. With this current proposal the church will have 82 parking
spaces; exceeding the ordinance requirement.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7628
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
Buffer and landscaping minimums are not currently being met on the
proposed drawing. The proposed building and parking areas along
Kavanaugh Boulevard and McKinley Street encroach into the required
9-foot wide on-site perimeter landscaping buffer area minimums. This is a
requirement of both the zoning and landscaping ordinances. Additionally,
the proposed width of the landscape buffer south and west of the
proposed southern parking lot is less than the 9-feet required by the
zoning ordinance and the 6 feet 9-inch minimums of the landscape
ordinance.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscape areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. McKinley and Pine Valley are classified on the Master Street Plan as
Collector Streets. A dedication of right-of-way as shown on the plans
of 30 feet from centerline on Pine Valley and 25 feet from centerline
for McKinley will be acceptable.
2. The proposed land use would classify South Street and Kavanaugh on
the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. The proposed right-of-
way dedication for a minor commercial street to 25 feet from centerline
is acceptable. However, a five-foot public sidewalk must be
maintained between back of curb and the right-of-way line.
3. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection
of all streets.
4. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan.
Construct one-half street improvement to these streets inkling 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development. For existing curb, gutter,
sidewalks and handicap ramps, repair or replace as needed.
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).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7628
3
6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site
grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved
prior to the start of construction.
7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
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: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met.
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact
Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of
the developer. Location of existing water facilities should be
confirmed.
No trees shall be planted within 5 feet of public water facilities.
This development will have minor impact on the existing water
distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure
and fire protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per Code. Contact Fire Department.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is located on a CATA bus route.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7628
4
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding building height and design, building area,
signage, site lighting, dumpster location and screening, fencing and phasing.
Staff asked for more information on the church’s pre-school operation and the
seating capacity in the sanctuary. Staff informed the Committee that there did
not appear to be any bill of assurance issues. Staff noted the need for a setback
variance.
Public Works Comments were discussed. Staff stated the rights-of-way
proposed on the plan were adequate. Staff noted a required sidewalk on the
Kavanaugh Blvd. perimeter, in front of the church building, had not been shown.
Landscape Comments were presented and discussed. Staff noted the proposed
landscape areas did not comply with Ordinance minimums.
Utility comments were noted. The applicants were advised to contact the
individual utilities, if there were questions.
The applicants were advised to meet with the neighborhood residents. The
Committee directed the applicants to respond to staff issues by April 21, 2004.
The item was forwarded to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Westover Hills Presbyterian Church is located on the R-2 zoned property at 6400
Kavanaugh Blvd. The church currently occupies most of the block bounded by
Kavanaugh Blvd., Pine Valley Road, South Drive and McKinley Street. The site
contains a sanctuary building, an education building and parking. The church
has acquired four, R-2 zoned lots across from the church, on the southwest
corner of Kavanaugh and McKinley.
The church is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the
phased development of a new building and parking on these properties. The
church proposes to remove the existing, two-story education building and a
residence to allow for construction of parking, and a new, two-story building
containing fellowship space, offices and classrooms. The church also proposes
to remove two residences from the property south of Kavanaugh Blvd. and to
build a 42 space parking lot. The building project will be phased to allow the
church and preschool to operate continuously during construction. All phases of
work will be done without interruption over the course of approximately 14
months. Phase I involves the construction of the new parking lot south of
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7628
5
Kavanaugh Blvd. The church hopes to have the residences relocated. Phase II
will be the construction of the western end of the new, two-story facility. The final
phase will be the removal of the existing education building followed by
construction of the new administrative offices and church entrance area and
parking. The new building will be two-stories in height but the first floor will be
partially below grade, reducing the overall appearance of the height of the
structure.
The new building will be designed in a style that complements the existing
sanctuary. The new roof design and materials are similar to the standing seam
metal roofing used on the existing church sanctuary using a combination of
hipped and gabled roof areas. Signage will consist of a single ground mounted
sign and wall signage, all complying with ordinance standards for office and
institutional districts. Building site lighting will be incorporated into the design
and will primarily consist of shielded porch and walkway lighting. Parking lot
lighting will consist of shielded pole lights with controlled downlight only. The
dumpster pad will be located on the north side of the existing sanctuary and will
be screened to comply with ordinance requirements.
Several variances are requested to allow the development, as proposed. The
new building is proposed to have a setback from the Kavanaugh Blvd. property
line on the south of 1 ft. 8-inches to 7 ft. 2-inches. The setback from the South
Drive property line on the north is proposed to be 3 ft. 8-inches. The Code
requires a setback of 25 feet and a 9-foot street buffer in both instances. The
landscape strip/buffer on the south side of the proposed parking lot on the south
side of Kavanaugh Blvd. appears to be only 2 to 3 feet in width. The buffer
ordinance requires a 9-foot wide buffer strip in this area and the landscape
ordinance requires a minimum of a 6 ft. 9-inches landscape strip. The church
proposes to purchase the adjacent property at some point. Since the church
does not own that adjacent property, staff believes the ordinance requirements
for buffers and landscaping should be met. Additionally, the church proposes to
construct the parking lots using a pervious paving approach. Staff is supportive
of the variances to allow reduced building setbacks and street buffers associated
with the new building and to allow the use of the pervious paving.
In general, staff is supportive of the application. On April 21, 2004, the applicant
submitted a revised site plan and responses to issues raised at Subdivision
Committee. Those responses are incorporated into the analysis above. The bill
of assurance does not address use issues. No changes are proposed to the day
care/preschool operation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7628
6
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the staff report.
2. All site lighting is to be shielded downward and into the site.
3. Pick up of the dumpster is to be limited to 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
Staff recommends approval of the following variances:
1. Setback and buffer variances to allow the proposed building setbacks and
buffers as noted for the proposed new building.
2. A paving variance to allow the use of pervious paved surface for the new
parking lots. Materials must be approved by staff.
Staff does not recommend approval of the reduced buffer and landscaping for
the south perimeter of the new parking lot located south of Kavanaugh Blvd.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There was one objector present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. Staff recommended
denial of the buffer and landscape variances for the parking lot south of
Kavanaugh Blvd.
Tom Fennell spoke on behalf of the church and stated the buffer would be
increased for the parking lot; eliminating the need for a variance. He stated the
church had met with the neighbors. Mr. Fennell stated it was difficult to do infill
redevelopment. He asked those present in favor of the application to stand.
Several persons responded.
Connie Carbary, of 1810 N. McKinley, spoke in opposition. She stated she was
not opposed to the church expanding; but she was opposed to the parking lot
south of Kavanaugh Blvd. and the demolishing of houses. Ms. Carbary stated
the new parking lot would result in more traffic on McKinley Street, which is
already used as a “cut-through”. She stated the church did not do a good job of
maintaining its existing landscaping.
Mr. Fennell responded that the landscaping was being completely redone on the
entire site and would be “exceptional”. He stated any lighting would be shielded
to protect the neighbors.
A motion was made to approve the application, as amended, including all staff
comments and recommendations. The motion was approved with a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-7629
NAME: Cruse Uniform and Equipment –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 1001 John Barrow Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Cruse Properties, LLC/Clements and Associates,
Architects
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a new building, a portion of which will
be used for the installation of equipment on law
enforcement and emergency vehicles. The property
is zoned C-3.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the east side of John Barrow Road, between Riley
Drive and Kanis Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located in an area of mixed uses and zoning. The C-3
properties to the north contain a variety of uses. The O-2 zoned property
to the east is undeveloped but has recently been discussed as the
proposed site of a new, psychiatric hospital. The large area of C-3 zoned
properties to the south also contains a variety of commercial uses. An
office/mini-warehouse development and a single family neighborhood are
located on C-3 and R-2 zoned properties across Barrow Road, to the
west. This proposed, enclosed use should be compatible with uses in the
area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the John Barrow, Penbrook
and Brownwood Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
As a general retail use, this 14,000 square foot requires 46 parking
spaces. Forty-eight (48) parking spaces are proposed, including 2
handicap. Access to the site is via a single driveway off of John Barrow
Road. A service drive will circle around the building to provide access to
the garage doors for vehicle service and truck deliveries. All parking and
drives will comply with ordinance standards.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7629
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinance is required.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to obtaining a construction permit, it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements
can be given when properly preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or larger.
Trees to be preserved must be protected to their dripline with protective
fencing.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. John Barrow Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be
required. Show the centerline and prepare on the plans.
2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in
the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Sidewalks with appropriate
handicap ramps are required. (Shown on plans.)
3. Detention basin is shown on the site grading plan.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy: No Comments received.
CenterPoint Energy: CenterPoint Energy has a 10” steel high pressure
line in an easement in this area. More detailed drawings are needed.
Southwestern Bell: No Comments received.
Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of
request for water service must be met.
A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7629
3
Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of
the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 15, 2004)
The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding building design, signage, days and hours of
operation, number of employees, fencing and site lighting. Staff asked the
applicant to show areas for vehicles waiting service or to be picked up. Staff
asked that the applicant provide a copy of the bill of assurance. In response to a
question from staff, the applicant responded that a septic tank was being
proposed, rather than service through Little Rock Wastewater. Staff asked the
applicant to verify that there was no requirement to tie on to city sewer.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were noted and discussed. The
applicant was advised to contact the various utility companies or the Fire
Department, if there were questions about their comments.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by April 21, 2004. The
Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Cruse Uniforms and equipment proposes to construct a new, one-story 14,000
square foot building on the C-3 zoned tract located at 1001 John Barrow Road.
The company specializes in the sales of uniforms, equipment and accessories to
law enforcement and emergency personnel. The service is limited to a specific
clientele and is not for the general public’s use. 1,700 square feet of the new
building will consist of an area for the installation of equipment on law
enforcement and emergency vehicles. Garage doors on the north and south
sides of the building will provide means of ingress and egress. The installation of
parts, equipment and accessories on vehicles requires a conditional use permit
in C-3.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7629
4
The proposed building is of metal construction with a 40 foot section of brick
veneer at the front entrance. The roof will be metal standing seam. A single wall
sign will be placed on the front façade of the building. No ground-mounted
signage is proposed at this time. Any signage, including a future ground sign,
must comply with ordinance standards. Normal hours of operation are 8:30 a.m.
– 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. The business has 14 employees, one of
which is outside sales. Site lighting will consist of 10 wall packs mounted to the
building. There will be at the most 3 or 4 vehicles in installation in a day. If a
vehicle is waiting to be picked up, it would be parked in the far east end of the
parking lot. If there is a need for overnight storage of a vehicle, which is rare, it
will be stored in the building. The only fencing proposed is the screening fence
around the dumpster. The property is not within a subdivision and does not have
a bill of assurance. A fire hydrant will be installed on the site to comply with
Central Arkansas Water’s requirement. A septic system is proposed. The
applicant did speak with Little Rock Wastewater Utility and was advised that
there was no prohibition against using a septic tank and field, if approved by the
health department.
Staff is supportive of the proposed conditional use permit. To staff’s knowledge,
there are no outstanding issues. The proposed use is compatible with uses and
zoning in the area and should prove to be an asset to the community. On April
21, 2004, the applicant submitted a revised site plan and responses to staff
issues raised at Subdivision Committee. Those responses are reflected in the
Analysis above.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the application subject to compliance with the
staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: Z-7630
NAME: Neale Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 43 Nob View Circle
OWNER/APPLICANT: David F. Neale
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of an accessory dwelling on this R-2
zoned lot.
STAFF REPORT:
On April 19, 2004, the applicant requested that the item be withdrawn.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request to withdraw the
application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had requested that the
item be withdrawn. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for withdrawal by a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 22 FILE NO.: Z-7631
NAME: Graham Temple C.O.G.I.C. – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 4307 Frazier Pike
OWNER/APPLICANT: Graham Temple C.O.G.I.C./Arthur Devine
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
addition of a Family Life Center building on this R-3
zoned church site.
STAFF REPORT:
On April 22, 2004, the applicant requested that the item be deferred to the
June 17, 2004 Commission meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request for deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had requested that the
item be deferred to the June 17, 2004 agenda. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to June 17, 2004 by a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 23 FILE NO.: G-23-189
Name: Collins Street – Street Name Change
Location: Collins Street – Between East 2nd and
East 3rd Streets
Petitioner: City of Little Rock
Proposal: To change the name of this one block of
Collins Street to Mahlon Martin Street.
1. Abutting Uses and Ownership:
The street is bounded by the I-30 right-of-way on the west and the City of
Little Rock owned Presidential Park on the east.
2. Neighborhood Effect:
There will be no effect on the neighborhood. No properties take an
address from this block of Collins Street.
3. Neighborhood Position:
The Downtown, River Market and Hanger Hill Neighborhood Associations
were notified of this request. No position has been voiced by the
Associations. A letter of support has been received from the William J.
Clinton Presidential Foundation.
4. Effect on Public Services:
No opposition has been voiced by any of the reviewing agencies. Three
street name signs will be needed.
5. Utilities:
No opposition has been voiced by any of the reviewing utilities.
CATA:
No Comment received.
6. Staff Analysis:
The City of Little Rock is requesting to change the name of Collins Street,
between East 2nd and East 3rd Streets, to Mahlon Martin Street, in honor
of a past City Manager. The name change will be extended to the block
of Collins Street, between East 2nd Street and President Clinton Avenue,
once that street is rebuilt for two-way traffic.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-189
2
Mahlon Martin began his career as a City Employee in 1969 at the age of
23 as an organizer for the Model Cities Program. Later that year, he was
hired as the City’s first recruiting officer. In 1972, he was named the
director of the City’s Manpower Training Program. In that job, he caught
the eye of then City Manager Carleton McMullin who selected him to fill an
Administrative Assistant position in the City Manager’s office. Between
1975 and 1979, he served both as Assistant City Manager and Deputy
City Manager. He briefly left City employment before coming back “home”
to City government in 1980 when he was chosen from a nationwide
search by the Little Rock Board of Directors as Little Rock’s first black City
Manager. He served as City Manager from July 1980 to January 1983.
Mr. Martin subsequently served as the Director of the Arkansas
Department of Finance and Administration under then governor Bill
Clinton. He later served as Executive Director of the Winthrop Rockefeller
Foundation.
Mr. Martin passed away in 1995 at the age of 50. Because of the
proximity of Collins Street to the Presidential Library, and Mr. Martin’s
affiliation to Mr. Clinton, and as a show of respect for Mr. Martin’s
dedicated public service, the City of Little Rock supports this proposed
street name change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested Street Name Change.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 24 FILE NO.: G-23-190
Name: 20th Street – Street Name Change
Location: 20th Street – From Interstate 30
to S. University Avenue
Petitioner: Alonzo and Wanda Davis
Proposal: To change the name of 20th Street,
between I-30 and S. University Avenue,
to Charles Bussey Avenue.
1. Abutting Uses and Ownership:
City Staff counted 92 residences, 13 vacant residences, 3 multifamily
developments, 2 manufacturing business, 1 office use and 10 commercial
uses on this portion of 20th Street (a total of 121).
2. Neighborhood Effect:
The 121± individuals and businesses taking an address on 20th Street will
have to adjust to the street name change. The post office will honor the
previous name for up to a year, allowing those affected time to make the
name change.
3. Neighborhood Position:
Notice of the proposed Street Name Change was sent to the Coalition of
Little Rock Neighborhoods and The Downtown, East of Broadway, Wright
Avenue, Goodwill, LOVE, Midway, Stephens Area Faith, HOPE, Oak
Forest and Curran Conway Neighborhood Associations. None of these
organizations have voiced a position. The applicant is required to send
notice of the proposed name change to all individuals/businesses affected
by the change. Staff has received telephone calls both in opposition and
in support of the proposal.
4. Effect on Public Services:
Adjustments will need to be made in the City’s emergency response/911
System to account for the name change. Up to 70 street name signs will
need to be changed at an estimated cost of $75.00 per sign; a total of
$5,250.00±.
5. Utilities:
No opposition has been voiced by any of the reviewing utilities.
CATA:
No Comments received.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-190
2
6. Staff Analysis:
Alonzo and Wanda Davis have filed an application asking that 20th Street,
between Interstate 30 and S. University Avenue, be renamed Charles
Bussey Avenue in honor of a past mayor of the City of Little Rock.
Charles Bussey was elected to the Little Rock Board of Directors in 1969,
becoming the first black elected official in Arkansas since Reconstruction.
In 1981, he was elected mayor by his fellow Board members, becoming
the first black man to serve in that position in Little Rock. Mr. Bussey
served on the Little Rock Board of Directors for more than 20 years.
Mr. Bussey passed away in 1996 at the age of 78.
In recognition of Charles Bussey’s historic achievements and as a show of
respect for Mr. Bussey’s dedicated public service, the City of Little Rock
supports this proposed Street Name Change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City practice is to require petitions or letters of support from at least 50% of the
residents/businesses on a street being proposed for renaming. City Staff
counted some 121 residences/businesses on this stretch of 20th Street. The
applicant submitted 37 signatures; 27 in support of the name change and 10 in
opposition. While the City is clearly in support of the proposed name change,
Staff believes the applicant must show that there is a greater consensus of
support for the name change by those who would be affected by it.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and informed the Commission that the applicants had submitted
additional signatures of persons on 20th Street in support of the proposed street
name change. The additional signatures brought the number of persons in
support to over 50% of those residents on 20th Street. Staff recommended
approval of the application. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
After the vote was taken, Philip Gallaher, of 316 West 20th Street, stated the new
street name will create confusion. Mr. Gallaher had put the wrong item number
on the speaker card.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 25
Subject: Proposed amendment to Section 36-54
of Chapter 36 of the Code of
Ordinances regarding spacing of day
care family homes.
Request: That the Planning Commission receives
comments from interested parties and
the Plans Committee and vote on a
recommendation to the City Board of
Directors.
On February 12, 2004, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval
of various amendments to the Ordinance guidelines for day care family homes.
The amendments were modified slightly and adopted by the Board of Directors
at their March 16, 2004 meeting; Ordinance No. 19,065.
The Development Criteria for day care family homes are now as follow:
Day care family home:
a. This use may be located only in a single-family home, occupied by the
caregiver and which is the full time residence of the caregiver.
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.
f. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will be
approved for a day care family home proposed to be located within 300 feet
of a licensed day care center or an operating day care family home for which
a Special Use Permit has previously been approved. 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.
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.)
2
g. All day care family homes located in the City of Little Rock are required to
obtain a City of Little Rock business license and to pay an annual business
tax as specified in Chapter 17, of the Code.
h. A copy of the day care family home’s current State of Arkansas license must
be submitted to the City Collector’s Office each year at the time of payment of
the annual business tax.
i. All vehicles must be parked on an on-site paved surface.
j. All vehicles located on the site must be operational.
k. All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the property’s driveway and
not on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the Planning
Commission.
l. Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed by staff
every three (3) years for compliance with the development criteria and
Planning Commission approval.
m. The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed day
care family home.
Ordinance No. 19,065 also added the following revocation procedure which is
applicable to all uses approved under a Special Use Permit:
Revocation procedure. Any approved Special Use Permit may,
upon review and action by the Planning Commission, be revoked.
Revocation proceedings 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. 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. The
Planning Commission may revoke the Special Use Permit if it is
determined that the use approved under the Special Use Permit
is being conducted contrary to the original approved application
or contrary to any laws of the City of Little Rock or that there has
been substantial change in circumstance since the approval of
the Special Use Permit to the extent that the use has become
detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood.
Appeals from the action of the Planning Commission shall be as
set forth in Section 36-54(b).
May 6, 2004
ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.)
3
At its March 16, 2004 meeting, the Board of Directors directed staff to return to
the Planning Commission for the Commission to consider a further amendment;
to increase the spacing requirement for day care family homes from 300 feet to
750 feet.
On April 14, 2004, the Plans Committee of the Planning Commission considered
information related to changing the spacing requirement. Staff noted that of the
75± known day care family homes, 52 would not meet the spacing requirement.
The League of Women Voters of Pulaski County submitted a request that the
ordinance be left “as-is” , with the 300 feet spacing requirement, for a period of 3
years, with a review of its impact at that time. The Committee decided to send
that recommendation forward to the Commission.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends leaving the spacing requirement at 300 feet for a period of
3 years, with review of its impact at that time.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 6, 2004)
Staff presented the item and a recommended leaving the separation requirement
at 300 feet.
Commissioner Floyd spoke on behalf of the Plans Committee and recommended
leaving the separation requirement at 300 feet.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, voiced support for the current
ordinance standard of 300 feet. She voiced the League’s support for day care
family homes in general.
Troy Laha spoke in support of increasing the separation requirement to 750 feet.
He stated day care family homes needed to be moved out of neighborhoods and
onto collector and arterial streets. Mr. Laha stated day care family homes did not
provide the same level of education as a larger day care center.
In response to a question from Commissioner Williams, Mr. Laha stated he was
not familiar with what went on in a day care family home.
Jane Harrison, of 8617 Crofton Circle, asked the Commission to consider a 750
foot separation requirement.
A motion was made to approve increasing the separation requirement to 750
feet. The motion failed with a vote of 5 ayes, 6 noes and 0 absent.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 36 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS
PROVIDING FOR MODIFICATION OF VARIOUS PROCEDURES
AND LAND USE REGULATIONS RELATED TO DAY CARE
FAMILY HOMES; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Little Rock Planning Commission that it is
appropriate to make certain modifications to the procedures and regulations contained within
Chapter 36 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas related to day care family
homes; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications were presented and discussed at a public hearing of
the Little Rock Planning Commission where the Planning Commission voted to recommend
approval of the modifications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS.
SECTION 1. That various provisions of Chapter 36. be amended as follows:
Subsection (a). That Chapter 36., Section 36-54.(e)(3) be amended to read as follow:
f. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will be approved for a
day care family home proposed to be located within 750 feet of a licensed day care center
or an operating day care family home for which a Special Use Permit has previously been
approved. 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.
SECTION 2. Severability. In the event any title, section, paragraph, item, sentence, clause,
phrase, or word of this ordinance is declared or adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
declaration or adjudication shall not affect the remaining portions of the ordinance which shall
remain in full force and effect as if the portion so declared or adjudged invalid or unconstitutional
was not originally a part of the ordinance.
SECTION 3. Repealer. All laws, ordinances, resolutions, or parts of the same, that are
inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such
inconsistency.
SECTION 4. Emergency Clause. Whereas, it has been determined that it is necessary that
the proposed amendment become effective immediately to protect the quality of life in residential
neighborhoods; an emergency is hereby declared and this Ordinance shall take effect immediately
upon its passage.
PASSED:_____________________
ATTEST: APPROVED:
_____________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor