pc_11 15 2001subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
NOVEMBER 15,2001
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being eleven in number.
II.Approval of the Minutes of the October 4,2001 meeting.
The minutes were approved as mailed.
III.Members Present:Richard Downing
Fred Allen,Jr.
Craig Berry
Judith Faust
Bob Lowry
Norm Floyd
Rohn MuseBillRector
Mizan Rahman
Obray Nunnley,Jr.
Robert Stebbins
Members Absent:None
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
NOVEMBER 15,2001
4:00 P.M.
I.DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.Bridies Haven Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1322),South
side of Mann Road,approximately 400 feet east of Leah Lane
B.LU01-08-02 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City
Planning District from Single-family to Commercial
C.Rodgers —Short-Form PCD (Z-4985-E),2408 Wolfe Street /2407 Battery Street
D.Enterprise-Broadway —Short-Form PCD (Z-7090),Southeast
Corner of West 3'treet and Broadway
II.PRELIMINARY PLATS:
1.Mystery Woods Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1326),NorthoftheintersectionofWest57StreetandFreelandDrive
2.Otter Creek Business Park Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1328),Northwest Corner of Otter Creek Parkway and Stagecoach
Road
3.Covenant Cove Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1329),
Southwest Corner of Rutgers Drive and Lehigh Drive
4.Kidco Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1330),Located
approximately 750 feet north of the Northwest Corner of
Chenal Parkway and Kirk Road
III.PLANNED ZONING DEVELOPMENTS:
5.A Land Use Plan Amendment in the West Little Rock PlanningDistrict,Located at 2400 Block of Glover Street fromSingle-family and Multi-family to Commercial,(LU01-03-02)
Agenda,Page Two
III.PLANNED ZONING DEVELOPMENTS:(CONT.)
5.1 Window Works —Short-Form PD-C (Z-3250-A),2410 Glover Street
6.Stewart —Short-Form PCD (Z-7105),4200 John Barrow Road
7.Sea Inc —Short-Form PID (Z-7106),Southeast Corner of
Sibley Hole Road and West Baseline Road
8.A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning
District,Located at 2416 South Chester Street from Single-
family to Suburban Office,(LU01-08-03)
8.1 Center for Healing Hearts and Spirits Short Form PD-0
(Z-7107),2416 South Chester Street
IV.SITE PLAN REVIEWS:
9.Healthy Lawns and Shrubs Inc.Subdivision Site Plan Review
(S-1327),Located on the West side of Westpark Drive,
approximately 450 feet South of West 12 Street
V.OTHER MATTERS:
10.Adoption of 2002 Planning Commission Calendar
BA
R
R
E
T
T
l(
4
5
RO
A
D
o
8
z
Pu
b
l
i
c
He
a
r
i
n
g
AR
K
A
N
S
A
g
it
e
m
s
45
P
FX
'P
P
(
(
5
5.
1
PI
V
4
(
I 8
1-
4
5
6
~
4
I
49
'
@
IC
V
PR
I
D
E
VA
L
E
MA
R
K
H
A
M
LE
E
Rl
Vs
-
R
MA
R
K
M
CI
T
Y
UM
I
T
S
o
1-
6
5
KA
N
I
S
z
1-
6
5
6
o
MW
S
12
M
12
T
H
9
TH
o
o
E
IO
T
H
e(
H
8
IP
OC
(
Y
C(
E
RO
O
S
E
V
E
L
T
8
M
I-
S
D
AM
QV
P
(
M
3
8
RO
O
S
E
V
E
L
T
LA
W
S
O
N
8
8.
~
I-
4
4
D
-4
4
LA
R
S
O
N
1
FR
A
l
l
E
R
PI
K
E
o
QT
Y
UM
I
1
5
ZE
U
B
E
R
DA
V
I
D
8
3 8
oo
KI
O'
D
O
D
D
65
T
H
65
M
RA
I
N
E
S
VA
L
L
E
Y
GT
Y
OM
I
T
S
?
I-
50
65
DI
X
O
N
BA
S
E
L
I
N
E
A
EL
I
N
E
2
o~
7
Y
PC
I
L
DI
X
O
N
L
56
5
OT
T
E
R
AR
E
(
V
A
L
E
MA
VA
CU
T
O
F
F
CR
E
E
K
WE
S
T
BU
N
K
E
R
2
CF
VI
N
S
O
N
Y
Q
DR
E
H
E
R
AL
E
X
A
N
D
E
R
5
YE
R
SP
C
S
.
I
C
OF
F
CU
T
O
F
F
o
I
CU
T
O
F
F
\
CI
T
Y
LI
M
I
T
S
OA
'
L
16
1
6
56
5
A
R
SH
E
PR
A
T
T
14
5
T
H
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Ag
e
n
d
a
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
15
,
20
0
1
November 1 ,2001
ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:S-1322
NAME:Birdies Haven —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:South side of Mann Road;approximately 400 feet east
of Leah Lane
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Independent Investment Marlar Engineering
Management Group 5318 J.F.K.Blvd.
6808 Baseline Road No.Little Rock,AR 72116
Little Rock,AR 72209
AREA:1.84+acres NUMBER OF LOTS:7 FT.NEW STREET:315+
ZONING:R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:15
CENSUS TRACT:41.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide a 1.84+acre tract into
7 single family residential lots,with an eighth tract to
be set aside as a small park area.A single cul-de-sac is
proposed to access the subdivision from Mann Road.
STAFF REPORT:
The applicant was not present at the September 13,2001
Subdivision Committee meeting.Staff informed the Committee
1
November 1.-2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1322
that there were many deficiencies in the proposed plat.The
Committee determined the item should be deferred to the next
regularly scheduled Subdivision agenda.Staff advised the
applicant of this action and provided him a copy of the staff
comments that were presented at the Subdivision Committee
meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 4,2001)
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.
A letter of opposition had been received from Janet Berry,
President of SWLR UP.Staff informed the Commission that the
item needed to be deferred due to the many deficiencies in the
proposed plat.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to
the November 15,2001 meeting by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
On October 24,2001,the applicant submitted a letter requesting
the item be deferred until the next Subdivision Hearing,
January 3,2002.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronOctober24,2001 requesting that this item be deferred
to the January 3,2002 agenda.Staff supported the deferral
request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral to the January 3,2002 meeting by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
2
November j.5,2001
ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:LU01-08-02
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Central City
Planning District
Location:2408 Wolfe St.
Rscenest:Single Family to Commercial
Source:Emma Rogers
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City PlanningDistrictfromSingleFamilytoCommercial.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 use the property for day
care and selected 0-1 and C-2 uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is occupied by a vacant building and is
currently zoned R-4 Two Family and R-5 Urban Residence andisapproximately.94+acres in size.All of the
surrounding property is zoned R-4 Two Family.A church
occupies the neighboring property to the south while the
property to the west is the campus of the Mitchell
Elementary School.The remainder of the surrounding
property is developed with housing.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On January 4,2000 a change was made from Single Family to
Mixed Use at 2311 S.Spring Street about 1 mile East of the
applicant's property.
On June 15,1999 a change was made from Single Family and
Mixed Use to Public Institutional on Wright Avenue and Park
Street about a '&mile Northwest of the property in
question.
On June 1,1999 a change was made from Mining to Park/Open
Space,Industrial,and Single Family at Arch Street and I-
30 about 1 mile Southeast of the area in question.
\
November 15,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-02
The applicant's property is shown as Single Family on the
Future Land Use Plan.The surrounding property is all
shown as Single Family except for the property to the west
that is shown as Public Institutional.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
The Master Street Plan shows Roosevelt Road as a Principal
Arterial.24 "Street,Battery Street,and Wolfe Street are
shown as Standard Residential streets.There are no
bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan that would be
affected by this amendment.
PARKS:
The 2001 Little Rock Park and Recreation Master Plan
proposes an eight-block strategy of providing facilities
within an eight block radius of all residential areas.The
plan also states that playground facilities (such as the
one at Mitchell Elementary)are included in the eight-block
strategy.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in an area not covered by a
city recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant'property lies in the Central High School
National Historic District.The historic district is
intended to preserve the neighborhood surrounding the
historic site.Any future development in this area would
need to fit the design guidelines of the historic district.
The purpose of the guidelines is to provide standards to
preserve the area's unique architectural heritage.The
guidelines are not intended to hinder the continued
maintenance or repair of a structure,but are used
primarily for projects that involve a new addition to a
house or for design projects that may be seen from the
street.Overall,the intension of design guidelines is for
the preservation of a structure's architecture;guidelines
2
Novembe '"15,2001
SUBD IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-02
are viewed as broadly as possible in order to enable the
property owner to maintain the property and retain
architectural elements.
Mitchell Elementary School is located across Battery Street
from this application and the Gospel Temple Baptist Church
lying immediately to the south.The neighboring public
institutional uses are of a scale that is compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood.C-2 and 0-1 uses,as
proposed,in the neighborhood would introduce the potential
for a wide variety of uses near the elementary school.
Some of the allowable uses such as daycare center,private
schools,and kindergartens would be compatible with the
school across the street and fit the character of the
neighborhood.Other allowable uses such as eating
establishments,beauty shops,and Laundromats would not be
compatible with the school across the street and would notfittheresidentialcharacteroftheneighborhood.
Commercial uses across from a school on a residential
street may cause traffic conflicts from both the loading
and unloading of school students and the commercial traffic
throughout the day.In addition,the residential streets
serving the property would need to support a greater volume
of traffic than the streets are designed to accommodate.
The applicant'property sits in the middle of the block
midway between Roosevelt Road to the south and W.24 Street
to the north.The applicant's property fronts on both
Wolfe and Battery Streets.However,the frontage along
Wolfe Street is wider than the frontage along BatteryStreet.Any conflicts of loading and unloading of students
would occur on Battery Street.Regardless of which side of
the applicant's property the loading and unloading of
students takes place,the loading and unloading would take
place in mid-block.
Most of the neighborhood's commercial property sits at the
intersection of Roosevelt Road and Dr.Martin Luther KingJr.Drive.There is also vacant property zoned for
commercial uses located west of Summit Street on Roosevelt
Road.
3
Novembe~..5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-02
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood
associations:Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association,
Central High Neighborhood Association,East of Broadway
Neighborhood Association,Meadowbrook Neighborhood
Association,MLK Neighborhood Association,South End
Neighborhood Association,South End Neighborhood
Developers,and Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association.At
this time staff has not received any comments from area
residents or neighborhood associations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.A change to
Commercial would place a conflicting land use category
inside a residential neighborhood in an area where there
are available existing non-developed commercial areas.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 4~2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Dana Carney,City Staff,initiated a
discussion about the timing of the notices for the related
zone change case in item 2.1.After a brief discussion
between the Planning Commission,City Staff,the
representative of the applicant,and Mr.Cedric Rogers,a
determination was made that the applicant missed the
deadline for mailing notices to the neighboring property
owners.Because of this The Commission voted to defer the
request for rezoning.A determination was made to defer
the Land Use Plan item in order to be discussed at the same
meeting as the related zoning item.
A motion to defer item 2 to the November 15,2001 meeting
and was approved with a vote of 8 ayes,1 no,and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Donna James,City Staff,made a presentation of
4
Novembe~i5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-02
item C so the discussion could coincide with the discussionforitemB.See item C for a complete discussion
concerning the Short,Form Planned Commercial Development.
Ruth Bell,representing the League of Women Voters of
Pulaski County,spoke in opposition to the Land Use Plan
Amendment.Ms.Bell stated that the amendment would place
a Commercial use in an area surrounded by PublicInstitutionalandSingleFamilyuses.
Discussion that followed focused on the zoning action.
A motion was made to defer items B &C to the November 29,
2001 Planning Commission Meeting.The deferral failed with
a vote of 3 ayes,8 noes,and 0 absent.
A motion was made to approve item B as presented.The item
was denied with a vote of 0 ayes,11 noes,and 0 absent.
5
\
November 1 ,2001
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
NAME:Rodgers Short-Form PCD
LOCATION:2408 Wolfe Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Emma Rodgers Michael Hahn,Architect
717 Bradburn Road P.O.Box 1285
No.Little Rock,AR 72117 Little Rock,AR 72203
AREA:.64+acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:
Current:R-4 and R-5
Proposed:PCD
ALLOWED USES:Residential
PROPOSED USE:Mixed Use Development including duplex, daycare
and selected 0-1 and C-2 uses.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On April 19,1988,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.
15,460 rezoning this property from R-4 and R-5 to PRD to allow
a residential and child care facility.On January 16,1990,the
Board passed Ordinance No.15,801 revising the PRD to eliminate
the residential care facility part of the project and replaceditwithanadditionaldaycarefacility.
On June 20,1995,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.16,919 which rezoned the property from PRD to POD.The uses
which were permitted in and on the POD site were to be limited
'I
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
to the two-family dwelling which is located at 2407 S.BatteryStreetandthedaycarefacilitywhichwasauthorizedby
Ordinance No.15,801,plus the following uses from the 0-1 and
C-2 list of permitted uses:church;clinic (medical,dental,or optical);community welfare or health center;day nursery or
day care center;lodge or fraternal organization;nursing home
or convalescent home;office (general or professional);
photography studio;private school,kindergarten,or institutionforspecialeducation;school (business);school (public or
denominational);studio (art,speech,drama,dance,or otherartisticstudio);barber and beauty shop;and,eating place,limited to the ground floor of the existing building,with a
maximum of 800 square feet,to be a sit-down facility withoutdrive-in or drive-thru service and with carryout permitted,but
with no delivery service allowed.
To this date,the property has never completely developed and
most of the building is currently vacant.The parking lot
within the southern portion of the property was never
constructed.
The applicant,Emma Jean Rogers,submitted a letter to staff on
April 28,1999,requesting that the existing POD be revoked and
the property revert to its original R-4 and R-5 zoning.Mrs.
Rogers sold a portion of the property to Gospel Temple Baptist
Church for development of a church facility.
Lots 2,4-10,Block 9,McCarthy's Addition,Lot 10 and the South
'c of Lot 11,Block 8,Oak Terrace Addition reverted to R-4
zoning.Lots 11 and 12,Block 9,McCarthy's Addition revertedtoR-5 zoning.
On July 6,1999,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.
18,045 which revoked the three previous PZD ordinances.On
May 27,1999,the Planning Commission had approved a conditional
use permit for a church to be constructed on the southern
portion of the site.That church has been constructed.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now requesting that the variety of 0-1 and
C-2 uses authorized under the 1995 Planned Development bereinstated.Those uses are outlined in the previous
paragraph.Development consists of the one,large buildingthatstretchesfromWolfeStreettoBatteryStreet,24on-site parking spaces and rebuilding a portion of the
building that was damaged by a tornado.The applicant
proposes to use the 49 parking spaces on the adjacent
church site during non-church hours.
2
November l.,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is occupied by a large,18,038 square footbuilding.Portions of the building are two-stories inheight.The portion nearest Battery Street is one-story inheight.A portion of the structure was damaged in a
tornado and is proposed to be rebuilt.A paved but
otherwise unimproved parking area is located north of thebuilding.A completely unimproved parking area is south ofthebuilding.The southern portion of the block has beenrecentlydevelopedasanewchurch.Large areas of single
family and two family residences extend north,east and
south of this property.An elementary school is located
west of the site,across Battery Street.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
All owners of property within 200 feet of the site were to
have been notified by the applicant.Staff notified allresidentswithin300feetwhocouldbeidentifiedandthe
Downtown,Central High and Wright Avenue NeighborhoodAssociations.As of this writing,staff has received no
comments.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.5.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per
Sec.29-186(e).
6.A Grading Permit will be required per Sec.29-186(c)
and (d).
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main located on site.Contact Little Rock
Wastewater Utility for details.See Attached Map.
Entergy:No Comments.
2QUCLA:No Comments.
3
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger or
additional meters are needed.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No Issues.
CATA:Project site is located on bus routes ¹11 and 14
and may affect bus radius,turnout and route.Please
inform CATA of construction start and end dates.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Central City Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Commercial Development for a day care center.The property
is currently zoned R-4 Two-Family and R-5 Urban Residence.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a
separate item on this agenda.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's
property lies in an area not covered by a city recognized
neighborhood action plan.
Landsca e Issues:
A landscaping upgrade toward compliance with the Landscape
Ordinance equal to the expansion proposed (14%)will be
required.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(SEPTEMBER 13,2001)
The applicant was not present.Staff informed the
Committee of the need for more information on hours of
operation,dumpster location,signage and the size of the
daycare operation.Public Works and Landscape Comments
were noted.Staff noted no agreement to allow use of the
church parking lot had been submitted.
4
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
Staff was asked to meet with the applicant.The Committee
determined there were no other issues and forwarded the
item to the Commission.
H .ANALYSIS:
Subsequent to the Subdivision Committee meeting,staff did
meet with the applicant.Some issues were resolved.The
day care center use was much more clearly defined.The
proposed day care will have a maximum of 100 children and
10 employees.Hours of operation for the day care are 6:00
a.m.—6:00 p.m.,Monday —Friday.One,8 feet by 12 feet
ground mounted sign will be placed on the east side of the
property.One,3 feet by 14 feet wall sign will be mounted
on the west faqade,facing Battery Street.No additional
fencing will be installed.Existing,6 feet tall wood
privacy fencing on the north and south perimeters will
remain.The parking lot south of the building will be
paved.There will be no outside lighting other than
lighting at the entry doors.
Authorization to use the church parking lot has not yet
been received.No further details on any of the other
proposed uses have been submitted.
Staff is not supportive of the application,as filed.In
our opinion,the multiple office and commercial uses
proposed from the 0-1 and 0-2 zoning districts are not
appropriate for this location.The property is located in
the heart of a primarily single-family residential
neighborhood.This neighborhood extends both north and
south of Roosevelt Road,in all directions for several
blocks around the site.The neighborhood is,at best,fragile;a situation compounded by the recent tornado that
damaged or destroyed so much of the neighborhood's
residential housing stock.Staff is concerned that
introducing the variety of non-residential uses proposed by
the applicant into this area would further exacerbate the
situation by negatively impacting the livability of
adjacent residential properties.
Staff does believe that allowing a neighborhood oriented
institutional use,such as the day care center would be
appropriate.The two blocks on the north side of
Roosevelt,from Wolfe to Summit have developed as a
neighborhood "institutional node."An elementary school
5
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
occupies one block while a new church has been built on the
southern half of the subject block.Allowing a day care
center to be located in this "node"seems appropriate.
It is staff's opinion that the neighborhood would be better
served by limiting the use to the day care;not by allowing
the variety of office and commercial uses proposed by the
applicant.
Staff would recommend that the application be amended to a
conditional use permit to allow only the day care center
operation,as proposed.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the application,as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 4~2001)
This item was presented in conjunction with Item No.2,
LU01-08-02;a Land Use Plan Amendment.
Brian Minyard,of the Planning Staff presented the proposed Plan
Amendment.
The applicant was present.There was one objector present.
Staff informed the Commission that it appeared that the required
notices for the rezoning had been sent later than the required
15 days.The post-mark on the certified mail receipts was
unclear but it appeared that the notices were sent no earlier
than 14 days and possibly be late as 5 days prior to the
meeting.
Cedric Rodgers,representing the application,stated he thought
the notices were sent September 24,2001,10 days prior to the
meeting.The Commission studied the mail receipts and reached a
consensus that the notices had been sent late.
Staff commented that the objector who was present had stated
that,although she lives next door,she did not received any
notice from the applicant.She had received staff's notice.
6
November 1 -2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
Mr.Rodgers was advised to renotify,in a timely manner.A
motion was made to defer the item to the November 15,2001
meeting.The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes,1 noe and
2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
The applicant was present.There were three objectors present.
This item was presented in conjunction with Item ¹B,LU01-08-02,
a Land Use Plan amendment.Staff informed the Commission the
applicant did not obtain a certified abstract list for property
owners within 200 feet of the site.The applicant used an
abstract listing from a previous application and researched
owners at the County Clerks office.There was some question ifallpropertyownerswithin200feetwerenotified.A waiver of
the By-Laws was required to accept the notification as
presented.After a brief discussion a motion was made to waive
the By-Laws and accept the notification to adjacent property
owners as presented.The vote passed 7 ayes,3 noes,0 absent
and 1 abstention (Robert Stebbins).
Staff presented the proposed plan amendment.Staff then
presented the proposed PCD and recommended denial of the
application as filed.Staff indicated the neighborhood would bebetterservedbylimitingtheuseofthepropertytoan
institutional type use such as a daycare facility.Staff
recommended the application be re-filed as a Conditional Use
Permit to allow a daycare center to operate on the property.
Ms.Emma Rodgers was present representing the application.She
indicated she was trying to rezone the property to the PRD
zoning it previously had.
Ms.Arkie Byrd spoke in opposition to the application.She
stated she had been a resident of the neighborhood since 1986
and had made a deliberate and conscious choice to live in the
area.She stated she would like to see the neighborhood retain
the current character plus see a resurgence.She stated
rezoning this property to commercial was not in the bestinterestoftheneighborhood.Ms.Byrd stated the school and
the church had stabilized and enhanced the neighborhood.She
stated she would not oppose a Conditional Use Permit for a
daycare center since it was a daycare before and there was a
7
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
need in the area for this service.She stated her objection was
to the broad based proposal to rezone the property to
commercial,which would create conflict and increased traffic
into the area.Ms.Byrd stated she lived diagonally from the
proposed project.
Ms.Ruth Bell,League of Women Voters of Pulaski County,stated
the League was opposed to both Items B and C.She stated the
Land Use Amendment would be placing commercial in an area of
residential and public instructional uses and this was a smallsite.Ms.Bell voiced opposition to the rezoning because it was
so wide open and if approved would allow such a wide range ofofficeandcommercialtypeuses.To the League,she stated,a
neighborhood type activity like a daycare center would be more
appropriate for the site.
John Phillips stated he had lived in the neighborhood since 1966
and he and his family had made a conscious decision to move into
the area.He stated he lived next door to the site,at 2400
Wolfe Street.He stated the area has a great history and was
growing and he would like to see the area continue to grow.HestatedhehadspokentoMr.Rodgers and indicated he would not
oppose a daycare center but any other commercial type use would
not be appropriate and would be a detriment to the neighborhood.
Commissioner Floyd questioned if the parking problem had been
resolved.Dana Carney,of the Planning Staff,indicated a
shared parking agreement had not been reached with the church.
Commissioner Nunnley stated he lived one and one-half blocks
from the site and he was aware the applicant had failed toutilizetheproperty.He stated there was a fire and the
property sat vacant for a while.He stated he and many of the
residents of the area had been able to turn the area around and
make the area a viable residential area again.He stated a
daycare would be an appropriate use of this property but a
commercial use would be a detriment to the community.
Commissioner Lowry questioned if the applicant could amend the
current application to be a daycare center application.Mr.
Lawson stated this would be a possibility since staff had the
necessary information for a Conditional Use Permit.Dana Carneystatedonpage5ofthewrite-up for this item,the staff
analysis goes into some detail of hours of operation,the numberofemployeesandthenumberofchildrentobeserved.He stated
those were typically the questions,which are answered as part
8
November 1 —2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
of a Conditional Use Permit application.Mr.Carney stated if
this application were amended,staff's recommendation would be
approval based on compliance with the conditions stated in thefirstparagraphofthestaffanalysis.
Commissioner Lowry asked Ms.Rodgers if she would be agreeable
to amend the current application to a Conditional Use Permit for
a daycare center based on the concerns which had been raised.
Commissioner Lowry stated this would help to eliminate some of
the concerns of the neighbors that the location might someday
become a use not desirable to the neighborhood.
Ms.Rodgers asked why if it were zoned PRD in 1999 and the uses
were not a problem then,why now have the uses become a problem.
Commissioner Lowry stated at the time the changes were made it
was beneficial to the neighborhood and now it would not be
beneficial to the neighborhood.He stated the fact that it was
that way before does not mean it is beneficial now.
Commissioner Nunnley stated the Central High Neighborhoods had
performed a housing survey in the area to designate the area as
a historical area.To add a commercial element into the area
would be a detriment to the work,which had gone into the area
to preserve the area and housing stock.Commissioner Nunnley
stated five years later when people have moved back into the
neighborhood,the neighborhood is on an upswing and preservation
of the residential character is important,this use is not
conducive.Had the applicant gone forward with the plans when
approved,he surmised,this would be a different discussion.
Commissioner Rector stated to Ms.Rodgers that she was entitled
to a vote for what she had applied for.She stated she
understood that but questioned if she could amend her
application to remove some of the uses to be allowed but still
be allowed more than a daycare center because there may be a
need to change types of businesses at the location.
Commissioner Nunnley stated to put a commercial business in a
residential area just because you own the land is not a good
planning practice.
Commissioner Faust questioned Ms.Rodgers if she was aware that
she had not applied for a Planned Residential Development but
for a Planned Commercial Development.Commissioner Faust stated
the issue was the commercial aspect of the development.
9
November 1.2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:2-4985-E
Commissioner Allen asked if the applicant would be willing to
amend the application to a CUP for a daycare center.Mr.
Sedrick Rodgers,son of the applicant,stated the original plan
was to have a PRD,residential and daycare.If the daycare did
not work then it would be changed back to residential.He
stated they would be willing to amend the application to a PRDiftheCommissionwouldapprovetheapplicationatthishearing.
Chairman Downing asked Mr.Giles if the applicant could amend
the application between the Planning Commission and the Board ofDirectors.Mr.Giles stated this was a possibility but the
Board could elect to send the application back requesting the
Planning Commission to review the application as presented at
the Board level.
Commissioner Lowry made a motion for approval of the item as
presented including all staff recommendations and comments.
Commissioner Rector asked staff if the applicant wanted to amend
the application to a CUP or a PRD ~Mr.Lawson stated a PRD butstaffwasunclearontheresidentialportionoftheapplication.
He stated staff had a clear understanding of the daycare aspectoftheproposal.Commissioner Rector asked the applicant how
the residential component of the PRD would be structured.We
understand the daycare would be a daycare said Commissioner
Rector.Ms.Rodgers stated the she wanted what was in placepriorto1999.
Commissioner Rector questioned staff as to what residential
piece could be included in the application.Mr.Lawson stated
the remainder of the property could be duplex or single-family.
He stated the Commission would have to make a motion to allow
the staff to work with the applicant to work out the details
between the current hearing and the Board meeting.
Commissioner Nunnley stated he realized there was a movement forfasttracknegotiations,however,he did not think this was the
application to try this technique on.He stated the Commission
was talking about an item that was going to affect the
neighborhood and he did not feel comfortable voting on an item
and letting staff and the applicant work out the details.Hestateddetailsshouldberesolvedandtheapplicationbrought,
back to the Commission and voted on with a recommendation to
send to the Board.Mr.Carney stated staff would work with the
applicant and bring the details back to the Commission in two
weeks.
10
November 1 -2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4985-E
Commissioner Lowry rescinded his previous motion.
Commissioner Lowry made the motion for deferral of Items B and C
for two-weeks (November 29,2001).The vote failed 3 ayes,8
noes,and 0 absent.
Commissioner Lowry then made a motion for deferral of Item C.
The item failed 5 ayes,6 noes and 0 absent.
Chairman Downing stated that it would be best to move the item
to the Board.
Commissioner Lowry made a motion for the approval of Item B to
include all staff recommendations and comments.The vote failed
0 ayes,11 noes,and 0 absent.Commissioner Lowry then made a
motion for approval of Item C as filed to include all staff
recommendations and comments.(This is voting on the PZD asfiledwithoutthestaffrecommendationforadaycarecenter.)
The vote failed 0 ayes,11 noes and 0 absent.
Mr.Lawson asked if the Commission would vote to waive the feeiftheapplicantweretoreapplywithinatimelymanner.
Commissioner Rector made the motion to waive the fee if the
applicant reapplies within one year.The vote passed 11 ayes,0
noes and 0 absent.
11
November 1 ,2001
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-7090
NAME:Enterprise —Broadway —Short-Form PD-C
LOCATION:Southeast corner of 3 and Broadway
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Allright Parking White-Daters
209 West 6 "Street 24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock,AR 72201 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:.32 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:
Current:UU
Proposed:PD-C
ALLOWED USES:Residential,office,commercial
PROPOSED USE:Automobile rental
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On March 7,2000,the Board of Directors approved Ordinance No.
18,228 which rezoned the core of Downtown Little Rock from
various zoning districts to "UU"Urban use or "R-4A"Low Density
Residential.This property was previously zoned "M"
Metrocenter,a zoning category established under Urban Renewal.
The UU classification allows any use in the Residential,Office
and Commercial districts.All uses must be enclosed or inside.
The district has specific development criteria that make it
unique among the City's zoning classifications.
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7090
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to utilize two lots of an asphalt
paved parking lot located at the southeast corner of 3 and
Broadway for a car rental business.The lots are to be
enclosed by a wrought iron fence and a 24 feet by 48 feet
modular building will be placed in the middle of the site
to serve as an office.Gates will provide access from 3
Street and from the parking lot to the south.Landscaping,
which is now nonexistent on the site,will be installed on
the perimeters and around the building.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is part of an existing,paved parking lot.
The property is paved virtually from property line to
property line.The surrounding area is characterized by
typical urban core development;including office buildings
and parking lots.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and
the Downtown Neighborhood Association were notified of the
proposed zoning.As of this writing,staff has received no
comments.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close unused driveways.
4.Restripe parking lot for future circulation.
5.Move gates to allow cars to park without blocking
sidewalks .
2
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7090
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments.
ARKLA:No Comments.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments.
Water:No objection.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No Comments.
CATA:Project site is located on bus routes 41,3,5,8
and 17 and may affect bus radius,turnout or route.Please
inform CATA of construction start and end dates.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Downtown Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use —Urban for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Development —Commercial for a car rental business.The
property is currently zoned Urban Use.
A land use plan amendment is not required.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the
Downtown Little Rock Framework for the Future Neighborhood
Action Plan.The Land Use and Zoning Goal supports the
establishment of Mixed Use —Urban and the establishment of
Urban Use Zoning in the area along Broadway and West 3
Streets where the applicant is located.Action statements
recommend the preservation of the character of downtown,
development and redevelopment of vacant property,and
encourage mixed uses throughout Downtown.
3
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7090
Landsca e Issues:
A 9-foot wide landscape perimeter strip,excluding
driveways,is required along the southern perimeter of
Lot 2.A total of 8%of the paved area on Lots 1 and 2
are required to be landscaped with interior islands.Since
this is a rehab of an existing site,some flexibility with
landscaping can be allowed.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(SEPTEMBER 13,2001)
Tim Daters was present representing the application.Staff
noted that additional information was needed on the
proposed building,fencing,signage,landscaping and
dumpster.Staff questioned if it were not possible to
rework the site plan to be more consistent with the"spirit"of the UU district.Public Works and Landscape
Comments were discussed by staff.Mr.Daters stated he
would meet with his client regarding the issues raised bystaff.He was advised to have a revised site plan and
answers to issues raised by staff to staff no later than
Wednesday,September 19,2001.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff met with representatives of Enterprise and White-Daters on
September 20,2001.Staff issues and concerns were discussed at
length.That same day,the applicant requested that the item be
deferred to the next Commission agenda.Staff believes the
issue should be kept on the Subdivision cycle of meetings and
should be deferred to the November 15,2001 Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 4,2001)
The applicant was 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.
4
'I
November 1 -'001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7090
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral to the November 15,2001 meeting.The vote was 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
On October 10,2001,the applicant submitted a letter requesting
that the item be withdrawn.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronOctober10,2001 requesting 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.
5
November.i5,2001
ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:S-1326
NAME:Mystery Woods Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:North of the intersection of West 57 Street and
Freeland Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Mystery Properties Corp.McGetrick E McGetrick
P.O.Box 56403 319 E.Markham StreetLittleRock,AR 72215 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:5.2+acres NUMBER OF LOTS:19 FT.NEW STREET:550
ZONING:R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:13
CENSUS TRACT:20.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide this undeveloped,5.2+acre parcel into 19 single-family residentiallots.The lots will be accessed by way of a new 550footcul-de-sac.The property is located north of
West 57 Street,near the Freeland Drive intersection.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant and cleared,with a scattering oftrees,and one dense stand in the southeast corner.
There is an existing residence on the southwest cornerofthesite.The property gently slopes to the north
away from West 57 "Street.The property is zoned R-2
Single-Family,as is the property in close proximitytothesite.The area around the site is developed assingle-family residence.Other uses in the area
I
Novembei i5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
consist of nonresidential uses along Geyer Springs
Road,including a large church facility.West 57Streetisunimprovedconsistingofa"chip-seal"
roadway surface.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS
As of this writing,staff has received one
informational call concerning this application.
Property owners abutting the site and the Geyer
Springs Neighborhood Association and Wakefield
Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public
Hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.West 57 Street property frontage needs to have the
sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA
standards.
2.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
3.A grading permit will be required on this
development.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
5.Easements for proposed stormwater detentionfacilitiesarerequired.
6.Analyze downstream stozmwater effects of this
development on adjacent developments to the south.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with
easements if service is requi red for the project.
Contact Jim Boyd at 376-2903 for details.
Entercnr:No comment received.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges in the area.
2
November:5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
Fire De artment:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No comment.
CATA:Project site is located near Bus Routes ¹17
and 17A but has no effect on bus radius,turnout and
route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN
Plannin Division:No comment.
Landsca e Issues:No comment.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the
application.Staff described the proposed plat and
noted several items,which needed to be shown on the
preliminary plat drawing.Staff questioned if the
existing single-family structure would be a part of
the plat.Mr.McGetrick stated the structure would be
moved out of the area.
Public Works issues were briefly discussed with regard
to stormwater detention.Bob Turner,Director of
Public Works,noted the applicant would need to submit
a preliminary storm drainage plan and provide storm
drainage analysis to assure protection of the lower
subdivisions with regard to run-off.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the
preliminary plat to the full Commission for final
action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat
drawing to staff on October 31,2001.The revised
plat addresses the issues as raised by staff and the
Subdivision Committee.The applicant submitted a
3
November ~5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
preliminary stormwater drainage analysis to determine
the effects of this development on adjacent
developments to the south.
Staff noted at the Subdivision Committee meeting that
the proposed lots conform to all ordinance standards.
Therefore,there should be no unresolved issues withthisapplication.Staff feels that the proposed
revised preliminary plat will have no adverse impact
on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat
subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in
paragraphs D and E of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had
submitted a letter on November 12,2001 requesting deferraltotheNovember29,2001 public hearing.The applicantfailedtonotifyabuttingpropertyownerswithinthe
required time.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved fordeferralbyavoteof11ayes,0 noes and 0 absent.
4
November i5,2001
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-1328
NAME:Otter Creek Business Park Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Approximately 140 feet north of the intersection of
Otter Creek Parkway and Stagecoach Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Otter Creek Land CO.McGetrick 6 McGetrick
¹2 Otter Creek Court 319 E.Markham Street
Little Rock,AR 72209 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:9.931+acres NUMBER OF LOTS:8 FT.NEW STREET:600
ZONING:C-1
PLANNING DISTRICT:16
CENSUS TRACT:42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes this 9.931+acre parcel be
divided into eight (8)lots and one tract.A portion
of Tract A is a dedicated 200-foot drainage and sewer
easement and the remainder of Tract A within this plat
will be dedicated as the same.Access to the project
will be from Stagecoach Road and Otter Creek Court.
Otter Creek Court,which currently ends in a cul-de-
sac,will be extended to the east to connect to
Stagecoach Road.The applicant proposed no access tolots1or8fromStagecoachRoad.All driveway
locations will be on Otter Creek Court.
Novembe~&5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1328
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped,grass-covered with a
portion in floodway.The site slopes from the west
and south to the north.The area to the east is
undeveloped,wooded and is currently zoned R-2.The
area to the south contains a strip commercial
development,a daycare facility and office uses with
C 1 zoning.The area to the west is a multi family
development (MF-18 zoning)and the area to the north
contains single-family residence many of which are
vacant with R-2 zoning as noted on the attached area
zoning map.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Property owners abutting the site and the Southwest
United for Progress Neighborhood Association and theOtterCreekHomeownersAssociationwerenotifiedof
the Public Hearing.As of this writing,staff hasreceivednocommentfromtheneighborhood.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Stagecoach Road is classified on the Master Street
Plan as a minor arterial.A dedication of right-
of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2.Otter Creek Court is classified on the Master
Street Plan as a commercial street.Dedicate total
right-of-way of 60 feet.
3.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"
(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street
improvements to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
4.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
5.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Show driveway locations on the plat.6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be
submitted for approval prior to start of work.7.Dedicate regulatory floodway to the City of Little
Rock.See Mel Hall for floodway line determination.
8.A sketch grading and drainage plan,a special flood
hazard permit,and a special grading permit for
2
November i5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1328
flood hazard areas are required.ADEQ and NPDES
permit is also required.
9.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
10.Easements for proposed stormwater detentionfacilitiesarerequired.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with
easements for Lot 1.Indicate the existing sewer main
crossing Lot 2 and Lot 7 or relocate the sewer main.
Contact Jim Boyd at 376-2903 for details.
E~nter:A ten-foot easement is required on the south
property line.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No comment received.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges in this area.A
development fee based on the size of the connection
applies for connections to the 12"main on the east
side of Stagecoach Road.
Fire De artment:Place fire hydrants per city
code.Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No comment.
CATA:Project site is not located on a dedicated bus
route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and
route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No comment.
Landsca e Issues:No comment.
3
November ~5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1328
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the preliminary
plat,noting additions,which were needed on the
preliminary plat.
Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,indicated
concern of Tract A and the relationship of the
floodway to the proposed lots.Mr.McGetrick stated
there was a channelization project as a part of the
Stagecoach Road widening by the Arkansas Highway and
Transportation Department and the property currently
has a 200 foot drainage and sewer easement which is
shown as Tract A.Mr.McGetrick indicated he would
work with Public Work for a floodway line
determination.
There was a brief discussion pertaining to the
driveway locations and the need for shared driveways
within the development.Mr.McGetrick indicted he
would consider this suggestion.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the
preliminary plat to the full Commission for final
action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat tostaffonOctober31,2001.The revised plat addresses
most of the issues as raised by staff and the
Subdivision Committee.The 15-foot sewer easement
across Lots 2 and 7 has been shown on the revised plat
and the 10-foot utility easement has been shown on the
south property line.
The interior driveway locations have been shown on the
revised plat with shared driveways between lots.The
driveway between proposed Lots 1 and 2 has been moved
to the east to align with the proposed driveway of
Lots 7 and 8.Public Works will require a no access
easement along Stagecoach Road.
4
November ~5,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1328
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge there are no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed
preliminary plat.The proposed preliminary plat
conforms to the Subdivision Ordinance and should have
no adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDAT IONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat
subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in
paragraphs D and E of this report.2.Provide a no access easement along Stagecoach Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant.
There were no objectors present.Staff informed the
Commission they had received the letter of support from the
Southwest Little Rock United for Progress Neighborhood
Association.
Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat subject,
to compliance with 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.
5
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-1329
NAME:Covenant Cove Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Southwest corner of Rutgers Drive and Lehigh Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Circle H.Industries White-Daters &Associates
¹24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock,AR Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:10.33+acres NUMBER OF LOTS:40 FT.NEW STREET:1,383
ZONING:R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:11
CENSUS TRACT:24.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Rear Private Drive
STAFF NOTE:
On October 17,2001,the applicant submitted a letter recpxestingthattheitembewithdrawn.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15 g 2 00 1 )
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had recpxested a
withdrawal of the item.There was no further discussion.The
item was placed on the Consent,Agenda and approved for
withdrawal.The vote was 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent.
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:S-1330
NAME:Kidco Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Located approximately 750 feet north of the northwest
corner of Chenal Parkway and Kirk Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Walter Quinn White-Daters and Associates
10901 Financial Center Pkwy 5 24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock,AR 72207 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:2.06+acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:19.2
CENSUS TRACT:42.10
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.A variance to allow a pipe-stem lot.
2.A variance from the maximum depth requirements for a pipe-stemlot.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the subdivision of this 2.06+acretractintotwo(2)lots.The proposed Lot 2 currently
houses an existing business,(a daycare facility)which
takes access through the parking lot of the ARKSYS
building.The proposal calls for a 30 foot access easement
to Kirk Road to allow access to the site.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow for a pipe-
stem lot in office zoning.The applicant is also
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1330
requesting a variance to allow a 30 foot wide 500 foot plus
pipe-stem lot.The ordinance allows a minimum width of 30
feet and a maximum depth of 300 feet.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The area of proposed Lot 2 contains an existing daycarecenterandlocatedontheproposedLot1isavacant
single-family residence.The property is zoned 0-2 as is
the property contiguous to the site as indicated on the
attached zoning map.The area to the south contains an
auto care center.The area to the east is undeveloped andcleared.Uses to the north and west of the site are
nonresidential uses,the ARSYS Building,United States PostOfficeandstripcommercialandoffice.Kirk Road is an
unimproved chip-seal roadway.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of the writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.Property owners within 200 feet of the site
and the St.Charles Property Owners Association and ParkwayPlacePropertyOwnersAssociationwerenotifiedofthe
Public Hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Kirk Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline.
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Show driveway location on the plat.3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
the street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development;including Lots 1 and 2.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way .shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
7.Provide access easement in writing for Lot 2.
2
November 1 —2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1330
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Easement required for existing sewer main.
Contact Jim Boyd at 376-2903 for details.
Entercn:Fifteen (15)foot easement regni red for existing
over-head utility line adjacent to Kirk Road.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No comment received.
Water:The north 20 feet of this property is dedicated as a
waterline easement recorded as instrument number
2000009555.Central Arkansas Water requests a 10-foot
utility easement adjoining the proposed west right-of-way
of Kirk Road.Acreage fee of $600 per acre has been paid
for this property.
Fire De artment:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin No comment.
CATA:Project site is not located on a dedicated bus
route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No comment.
Landsca e Issues:No comment.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Joe White was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed preliminary plat.Staff
noted items,which needed to be shown on the preliminary
plat drawing.
The deferral of street improvements to Kirk Road was
discussed.Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,did not
indicate support of the deferral and questioned if this
project would "trigger"the street improvements,which were
deferred from other projects.
3
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1330
Driveway locations and the 20-foot access and utility
easement were discussed.Mr.Turner suggested working with
the adjacent property owner for a shared driveway along the
north property line or increase the easement to 30 feet.
Mr.White indicated the property was developed and the area
was a part of their dedicated green space.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the
preliminary plat to the full Commission for final action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staf f
on October 31,2001.The revised plat addresses all of the
issues raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The
applicant has increased the width of the pipe-stem to 30feetandhasindicatedontheplatthedeveloperwill
construct 'c street improvements to Kirk Road.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge there are no outstanding
issues associated with the preliminary plat.The proposed
preliminary plat conforms to Subdivision Ordinance and
should have no adverse impact on the general area.
I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject
to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the recpxirements as noted in paragraphs D
and E of this report.
2.Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow a
pipe-stem lot (Lot 2)with an increased pipe-stem depth.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Joe White was present representing the applicant.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.Staff
also recommended approval of the variance for the pipe-stem lot
(Lot 2)and the variance to allow an increased depth of the
pipe-stem.
4
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1330
There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the
Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
5
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:LU01-03-02
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —West Little Rock
Planning District
Location:2410 Glover Street.
geest:Multi-family and Single Family to Commercial.
Source:Robert M.Brown,Development Consultants,Inc.
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment,in the West Little Rock Planning
District from Multi-family 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 they serve.The applicant
wishes to use the property to sell custom draperies and window
treatment.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Two houses occupy the study area and are currently zoned R-2
Single Family.The house on the applicant's property is vacant
and the site of a former daycare center.The area under reviewisapproximately1.15+acres in size.The property to the northiszonedC-1 Neighborhood Commercial and is the site of a bank.
The property to the east is an existing business zoned C-3
General Commercial.A small office building is located to the
southeast on land zoned 0-3 General Office.A house is located
on property to south zoned R-2 Single Family.Condominiums are
located to the west on land zoned MF-6 Multifamily.The
Watergate apartments are located to the northwest on land zoned
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On August 17,1999,a change was made from Multi-family to
Office and Commercial on Andover Court about 4 of a mile west of
the applicant's property.
On November 18,1997 a change was made from Multi-family to
Suburban Office north of Cantrell Road and west of Manney Road
about .15 miles east of the application area.
November 1.2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-03-02
On November 7,1996,multiple changes were made from Commercial,
Multi-family,Office,Public Institutional,and Single Family to
Commercial,Low Density Residential,Multi-family,Public
Institutional,and Single Family within a one-mile radius of the
site under review.
The applicant's property is shown as Multi-family on the Future
Land Use Plan.The neighboring property to the north and eastisshownascommercial.The property to the south is shown as
Single Family while the property to the west is shown as Multi-
family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Glover Street is a street with open drainage serving residences
located on the west side of the street and businesses located on
the east side.The Master Street Plan does not show any
Bikeways that would be affected by this amendment.
PARKS:
The 2001 Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan proposes
an eight-block strategy of providing facilities within an eight
block radius of all residential areas.The plan shows Reservoir
Park as an existing Large Urban Park located about 4 of a mile
west of the property under review.Due to the topography and
street layout,Reservoir Park would not be greatly affected bythisamendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the
forthcoming Midtown Neighborhood Action Plan.The steering
committee does not support the conversion of residential
structures into businesses but supports the improvement of
Commercial areas along Cantrell Road.
ANALYSIS:
The vacant house on the applicant's property is a former day
care center that faces Glover Street.The front yard of the
property is paved for a parking lot.The house also faces the
rear parking lot and back end of businesses located on Cantrell
Road.Both sides of Glover Street are paved for parking and
2
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-03-02
Glover Street functions as an alley serving these businesses.
Since the businesses located across the street from the
applicant's property face Cantrell Road,Glover Street provides
rear access for these properties.Most of the current traffic
on Glover Street would already consist of delivery trucks,
employees,and garbage pickup.
The Single Family residential property to the south faces
Biscayne Drive.The primary residential neighborhood near the
applicant's property starts west of Glover Street on Biscayne
Drive.The multi-family to the north and west are isolated from
the applicant's property and are accessed either from Andover
Court or Cantrell Road.Glover Street acts as a boundary
between the residential and non-residential uses in the area.
This site has been occupied by a quasi-retail use for twenty
plus years utilizing the current residential structure.With a
Planned Zoning Development,the residential character could be
maintained for this development.If the proposed PZD's
residential characteristics are maintained and the non-
residential characteristics are lesser than or not greater than
the previous use,then this development can fit into the plan
for the general area.The Land Use Plan is not to be
interpreted as site specific,but to give general guidelines.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Heights Neighborhood Association,Andover Square Residence
Association,Apache Crime Watch,Briarwood Neighborhood
Association,Evergreen Neighborhood Association,Meriwether
Neighborhood Association,Normandy-Shannon Property Owners
Association,Overlook Property Owners Association,Robinwood
Property Owners Association,South Normandy Property Owners
Association,and Tall Timber Homeowners Association.Staff has
received four comments from area residents.Three are opposed
to the change and one was neutral.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes a Land Use Plan amendment is not necessary for
this site.
3
I
November 1.,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-03-02
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Staff stated that a Land Use Plan amendment was not
necessary for this site and recommended withdrawal of this item.
Robert Brown,representing the applicant,asked that the item be
withdrawn.
A motion was made to withdrawal the item.The item was
withdrawn with a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes,and 0 absent.
4
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:5.1 FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
NAME:Window Works Short-Form PD-C
LOCATION:2410 Glover Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Window Works,Inc.Development Consultants Inc.
7619 Cantrell Road 2200 N.Rodney Parham Road
Little Rock,AR 72227 Little Rock,AR 72212
AREA:0.487+Acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single-family Residential with
a variance to allow a day-care
center.
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:Waiver of street improvements to
Glover Street.
BACKGROUND:
On September 18,1978,the Board of Adjustment approved a zoning
variance to allow a daycare center to operate on this site.The
use existed until recently when the daycare facility closed.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone this property from R-2 to
PD-C to use the existing buildings for the purpose of
operating a custom window covering business.The applicant
also proposes the addition of a 12-foot by 24 foot building
in the rear of the existing buildings to be use for storageofmaterials.The business also provides interior design
services and custom design of bed coverings.
November 1.2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
In addition to herself,the applicant has two (2)designers
and one (1)office manager.The designers will be located
in the main house in front but will spend a vast majority
of their time out of the shop.There are also two (2)
seamstresses,who will work in the smaller building in the
back.An installer picks up the finished draperies and
takes them out for installation upon completion.The
typical customer base is ten per day.Very seldom are more
than three customers in the shop at the same time.
The hours of operation will be:8:30 —5:30 Monday through
Friday and 10:00 —5:00 on Saturday.
The applicant proposes to use the existing,paved parking lot,
which provides space for 10 vehicles although,those spaces do
not meet ordinance standards.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains a single-family structure,which has been
used as a daycare center for the previous 23 years.The
front yard area is paved with no separation between the
property and the roadway.The structure fronts onto GloverStreet,which is unimproved and serves as a driveway
providing access to the parking lots for the nonresidential
uses to the east.These uses include Barbara Jean's andGraffiti's along with other businesses.Additionally,
Janet Jones Realty Company is located to the southeast of
the site.There is a single-family residence to the southofthesite,which is accessed by Glover Street,but is
oriented to Biscayne Street.From the intersection of
Glover and Biscayne south the area is single-family.
Watergate Apartments are located to the north of the site
and a gated condominium development is located to the west.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received numerous calls from
persons requesting information on this application.All
property owners within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet of the site who could be identified,and
the Andover Scpxare Residents Association were notified of
the Public Hearing.
2
November 1 —2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Proposed parking encroaches on street right-of-way.
Redesign and resubmit.
2.Eliminate parking backing up to the public street.
3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
the street including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.Trees in right-of-way
must be protected.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easementsifserviceisrequiredforthisproject.
EntercnEr:No comment received.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:It appears that this property does not have
frontage on a public water main.A public water main
extension may be required if changes in water service
are required or if an additional public fire hydrant is
required by the Little Rock Fire Department.Any
additional water facilities required will be installed
at the expense of the developer.
Fire De artment:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No comment received.
CATA:Project is located on Express Bus Route ¹25 but has
no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
3
November 1.—2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Multi-Family and Single-
Family for this property.The applicant has applied a
Planned Commercial Development for a retail business.The
property is currently zoned R-2 Single-Family.A Land Use
Plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate
item on this agenda.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in an area,which is
currently under development of a Neighborhood Action Plan.
The Mid-Town Neighborhood Action Plan will be completed by
mid-2002.
Landsca e Issues:
Since the proposed building expansion is under 10%of the
existing structures,no landscaping is required.However,if and when the parking area marked "potential future
parking"is development,perimeter landscaping of this area
will be necessary.Sufficient buffer and landscaping area
has been left to satisfy ordinance requirements.
Buildin Codes:
1.Handicap accessible parking space needs to be 16 foot
wide (8 foot designated isle).
2.Interior accessibility will require one restroom be ADA
accessible.
3.Submit commercial remodeling plans for permitting.
Contact Mark Whitaker at 371-4839 for details.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Joyce Holt and Robert Brown were present,representing the
application.Staff noted that some additional project
information was needed (hours of operation,dumpster
4
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
location,signage details).Mr.Brown indicated that the
additional information would be provided as requested.
Staff suggested the applicant eliminate the parking in the
rear.Mr.Brown indicted the applicant would consider this
suggestion.
Public Works stated a concern of the parking encroachments
to the roadway.A suggestion was made to request an
abandonment of the street right-of-way and to maintain a
service easement.
Landscaping requirements were discussed with regard to the
rear parking area.It was noted without the rear parking
area the site plan conforms to the zoning buffer and
landscape ordinance requirements.
After discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-C to the
full Commission for resolution.
H .ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan addressing most
of the issues raised by staff and the Subdivision
Committee.The hours of operation,the dumpster location
and signage details were addressed.
The hours of operation will be Monday through Friday from8:30 am to 5:30 pm and 10:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturdays.
There will not be a dumpster located on the property.The
applicant does not propose a ground mounted sign but will
instead have a wall mounted sign conforming to ordinance
standards for commercial uses.
The applicant proposes a 30 foot landscaped buffer area
adjacent to the west property line.There will be limited
fencing removed as a result of this project.The fencing,
which is proposed to be removed,is located adjacent to the
northeast corner of the building.
The parking area in the back has been removed leaving nine
parking spaces in the front of the building.Staff has
recommended the applicant pursue the abandonment of thestreetright-of-way from Biscayne to the north propertylineasapartofthisapplication.If approved,this
5
November 1 2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
would eliminate Glover Street as a public street since the
City Board of Directors abandoned the remainder of Glover
Street in 1972.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with this PD-C.The proposed PD-C zoning
for Window Works,Inc.should have no adverse impact on the
general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PD-C for Window Works,
Inc.rezoning request subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in Paragraphs
D,E and F.
2.Limit the number of employees to seven (7)employees.
3.Install a 30 foot landscaped buffer on the west property
line.
4.Abandon the public street right-of-way for the remainder
of Glover Street.
If the right-of-way is not abandoned staff will not support
the existing parking situation,which has vehicles backing
directly into the public street.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
The applicant was present.The item was discussed concurrently
with Item ¹5,LU01-08-02,a Land Use Plan amendment.The
applicant chose to withdraw the Land Use Plan amendment prior to
staff presenting the item.Staff then presented the proposed
PZD application and recommended approval subject to compliance
with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"
above.
Staff informed the Commission the applicant and the adjacent
property owner had reached an agreement with regard to the
right-of-way abandonment and should the Commission forward the
item to the Board of Directors,the abandonment of the street
right-of-way would be a part of their recommendation.
6
'I
November 1.,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
The applicant requested staff review the limitation of seven
employees and consider limiting the number of employees parking
on the site to seven.Mr.Jim Lawson,Planning Staff,indicated
staff would contact the adjacent property owners to determine if
this would be a concern.He stated that parking was the concern
raised by the adjacent landowners in previous conversations.If
this was an issue,then the details could be dealt with at the
Board of Directors level.
Mr.Lowry made a motion to approve the application as filed
including all staff comments and recommendations subject to the
abandonment of the street right-of-way requirement.
Chairman Downing indicated he had one card from a Mr.B.L.
Gibson.He questioned Mr.Gibson if he was in favor or
opposition to the application.
Mr.Gibson stated he was unclear as to the proposal and the
amount of property involved.He indicated his property was
located on Biscayne Drive,the second house from the
intersection of Glover Street and Biscayne Drive.He was
opposed to the house facing Biscayne Drive becoming non-
residential.He stated he had lived in the area since 1968 and
the area had changed over the years becoming non-residential.
He stated the house in question changed to a daycare center 20
plus years ago.He voiced his concern that if the house on
Biscayne Drive were to become commercial,this would be 20 feet
from his kitchen window.He stated he would be opposed to the
house on Biscayne Drive becoming non-residential.
Mr.Lawson stated the house on Biscayne Drive was different from
the house on Glover Street.He stated staff looked at the house
on Biscayne Drive and would not support changing it to a
commercial use.Mr.Lawson stated the house has a natural
dividing line and the feel of the area is residential after this
point.
Chairman Downing stated the Land Use proposal,which was
withdrawn,would have a greater effect on Mr.Gibson's concerns.
He stated the rezoning application was for a single use and that
use only and should the applicant go out of business then the
Commission would review a new application.
7
November 1.,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3250-A
Commissioner Rahman questioned the change in the Land Use Plan.
Mr.Lawson stated the applicant had requested a change from
residential to commercial.Mr.Lawson stated staff had looked
at the site as something different than residential but to
expand beyond the proposed site would not be advisable.He
stated staff did not want to introduce any more commercial into
the area.Commissioner Rahman then asked if this business went
out and a year from now someone wanted to put in an alternative
business what would be the procedure.Mr.Lawson stated they
would be starting back at square one.
Chairman Downing asked Mr.Gibson if he agreed with the
application as filed and noted if the business changed,the
neighbors would then have a chance to review prior to any other
business locating on the site.Mr.Gibson stated he was in
agreement with this business.Commissioner Lowry renewed his
motion,which was on the floor.
The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent.
8
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:Z-7105
NAME:Stewart Short-Form PCD
LOCATION:4200 John Barrow Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Acts Church Lemons Engineering Consultants
C/o Frank Stewart 204 Cherry Street
1423 Ingram Street Cabot,AR 72023
Conway,AR 72032
AREA:0.91+Acre NUMBER OF LOTS:6 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:C-3 &0-3 ALLOWED USES:Office/Commercial
PROPOSED USE:Office/Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposed to rezone the property located at
4200 John Barrow Road from 0-3 and C-3 to PCD.Five of the
six lots are currently zoned C-3.The proposal includes
the construction of a one-story 6,750 square foot building
to be used as a mix of office and commercial uses.There
are 22 parking spaces proposed as a part of this
application.
The site will have access from West 42"Street and from
John Barrow Road.The applicant proposes the hours of
operation to be from 8 am to 8 pm daily.Proposed uses of
the building would be 0-3 and C-3 uses with a proposed mix
of 50%office and 50%commercial.
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7105
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant,cleared with a scattering of trees and
shrubs and slightly lower in elevation to the north,south
and west.The site is at elevation with John Barrow Road.
Uses in the area include a daycare facility to the north a
vacant commercial structure to the northeast,Sober Living
Alcohol and Drug Rehabilitation facility to the east,
vacant 0-3 zoned property to the south and single-family
residences to the west.There is a billboard located on
the southeast corner of the property.John Barrow Road is
improved complete with sidewalks while West 42"Street is
improved with curb and gutter but has no sidewalk.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
All property owners within 200 feet of the site,all
residents within 300 feet of the site who could be
identified and the John Barrow Neighborhood Association,
Campus Place Property Owners Association and Westwood
Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public
Hearing.As of this writing,staff has received two
informational phone calls concerning this application.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
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.
2.West 42"Street is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
3.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at,the corner of John Barrow Road and West 42"Street.
4.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
5.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.6.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Driveway on John Barrow is too close to side
property line.
2
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7105
7.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
8.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.9.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
E~nter:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges in this area.If there arefacilitiesthatneedtobeadjustedand/or relocated,
contact Central Arkansas Water.That work would be done
at the expense of the developer.The Little Rock Fire
Department may require an additional public fire hydrant
in conjunction with this development.The fire hydrant
could be installed by Central Arkansas Water's forces at
the Developer's expense,but would need to be
coordinated with the contractor for this project.
Fire De artment:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No comment.
CATA:Project site is located near Bus Route N14 but has
no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Boyle Park PlanningDistrict.The Land Use Plan shows Office for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Commercial Development for a new mixed-use development of
commercial and office.The property is currently zoned 0-3
3
November 1 —2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7105
General Office and C—3 General Commercial.A Land Use Plan
amendment is not required.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the
John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan.The plan lists the
following recommendation concerning redevelopment in the
area:Enhance the business climate directed toward
encouraging new business and commercial establishments to
locate in the area as well as retention of existing
businesses.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set-aside for buffers and landscaping meet ordinance
requirements.A water source within 75 feet of all
landscaped areas will be required.
Buildin Codes:
1.Eight-foot isle for designated handicap space.2.Submit a full set of plans to building codes for review
and permitting.
Contact Mark Whitaker at 371-4839 for details.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Frank Stewart and Tim Lemons were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the PCD request.Staff noted that some additional project information was
needed (hours of operation,building heights,signagedetails,lighting plan).Mr.Lemons noted that the
additional information would be provided as requested.
Public Works requirements were discussed.Bob Turner,
Director of Public Works,indicated the driveway spacingrelatedtoJohnBarrowRoadwouldbeadequate.Mr.Lemons
stated he would work with Public Works to resolve any other
issues related to the project.
4
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7105
Landscape requirements were discussed.Staff indicated the
proposed buffers and landscaping met the current ordinance
requirements.Staff also stated a water source within 75
feet of all landscaped area would be required.
The Committee then forwarded the PCD to the full Commission
for resolution.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
October 31,2001.The revised site plan addresses the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The revised site plan includes an 8-foot by 10-foot ground
mounted sign to be placed at the John Barrow Road and West
42"Street intersections.The area of the sign conforms to
the ordinance requirements for signage.
Single family residence are located across the alley west
of the site therefore.Appropriate measures should be
taken to provide screening for those properties.Since
there are no activities proposed on the site behind the
building,the building itself can serve as screening if
designed properly.
The applicant has proposed any site lighting will be low-
level and directed away from adjacent residential zoned
properties.The applicant has also included the proposed
building height (15 feet)on the revised site plan.
The applicant proposes to replat Lots 1 —6,Block 162 John
Barrow Addition which will address the issue of dedication
of right-of-way and street intersection radius.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with this PCD.The proposed PCD zoning
should have no adverse impact on the general area.
5
November 1 —2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7105
I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PCD rezoning subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
2.Be no doors,windows or other openings on the rear wall
of the building beyond those emergency exits required by
building codes for fire safety.3.A screening/parapet wall be constructed along the rear
roofline of the building to screen roof mounted equipment
from the single-family residential property to the rear.4.Submit three (3)copies of the final plat for review bystaff.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15 g 2001 )
Staff informed the Commission the applicant submitted a letter
on November 1,2001 requesting the item be deferred to the
January 3,2002 Subdivision hearing.There was no further
d3.scuss3.0n.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral.The vote was 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent.
6
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:Z-7106
NAME:Sea Inc Short-Form PID
LOCATION:Southeast corner of Sibley Hole Road and West
Baseline Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Ron Taber White-Daters &Associates
Irwin &Saviers ¹24 Rahling Circle
1701 Centerview Drive Little Rock,AR 72223LittleRock,AR 72211
AREA:3.61+Acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single-family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Office/Warehouse
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.A deferral of Master Street Plan improvements to West Baseline
Road.
2.A deferral of Master Street Plan improvements to Sibley Hole
Road.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property f rom R-2 to
PID to allow for the construction of 4,000 square feet ofofficespaceand3,600 square feet of warehouse space.ThesitewillhaveaccessfrombothWestBaselineandSibley
Hole Roads.The applicant is requesting deferral of MasterStreetPlanimprovementstoWestBaselineRoadandSibley
Hole Road.
November 1.,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7106
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is heavily wooded and undeveloped as are the areas
to the northwest and to the west.Other uses in the area
include,the Little Rock Church to the east,I-2 zoned
property that contains Arkansas Excavation and a boat and
RV storage facility to the north,a PDI for Cord Packaging
to the south and a non-conforming salvage yard to the
northeast.Sibley Hole Road is an unimproved chip-seal
roadway.West Baseline Road is a two-lane asphalt roadway
with no sidewalks.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one informational
phone call concerning this application.All property
owners within 200 feet of the site,all residents within
300 feet who could be identified,and the Southwest United
for Progress Neighborhood Association were notified of the
Public Hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Baseline Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as
a principal arterial.Dedication of right-of-way to 55feetfromcenterlinewillberequired.
2.Sibley Hole Road is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
3.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is requiredatthecornerofSibleyHoleandBaselineRoads.
4.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvement to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
2
November 1 ,
—2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7106
7.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Move driveway on Baseline Road to the east to
meet 300 foot required spacing,or 150 foot sideline
spacing.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easementsifserviceisrequiredfortheproject.
Entercny:Eo comment received.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No comment received.
Water:If there are facilities that need to be adjusted
and/or relocated,contact Central Arkansas Water.TheLittleRockFireDepartmentmayrequireanadditional
public fire hydrant in conjunction with this
development.The fire hydrant could be installed byCentralArkansasWater's forces at Developer's expense,
but would need to be coordinated with the contractor forthisproject.
Fire De artment:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin No comment received.
CATA:Project site is located near Bus Routes ¹17 and 17A
but has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Otter Creek PlanningDistrict.The Land Use Plan shows Service Trades Districtforthisproperty.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Industrial Development for an industrial project.A Land
Use Plan amendment is not required.
3
November 1 2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7106
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The area lies within an area not currently covered by a
Neighborhood Action Plan.There is a committee in the
process of developing a Plan that will consider this area.
The committee was notified of this request.
Landsca e Issues:
The interior landscape island adjacent to the disabled
parking area must be increased to 150 square feet to count
toward the interior landscaping requirement.
A water source within 75 feet of all landscaped areas will be
required.
Screening of this site from the residential zoned properties
to the east and west is required.Since this site is heavily
wooded,(and with undergrowth)no additional screening is
necessary.
Prior to a building permit being issued,it will be
necessary to submit an approved landscape plan stamped with
the seal of a registered landscape architect.
Since this is a tree covered site,the City Beautiful
Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as
feasible.Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape
ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees
of 6-inch caliper or larger.
Buildin Codes:
1.Curb cuts/ramps should be made at the designated isle (in
the hatched area).
2.Isle needs to be 8-foot wide to meet minimum ADA
requirements.
3.Submit a full set of plans to building codes for review
and permitting.
Contact Mark Whitaker at 371-4839 for details.
4
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7106
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Mr.Joe White was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the PID request.Staff noted that
some additional information was needed (hours of operation,
building heights,signage details,dumpster locations).
Mr.White noted that the additional information would be
provided as requested.
The landscape requirements were also discussed.It was
noted that the proposed site plan conformed to the zoning
buffer and landscape ordinance requirements.It was noted
the interior island adjacent to the disable parking area
must be increased to 150 square feet to count toward theinteriorlandscapingrequirement.
Since this site is tree-covered,the City Beautiful
Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible.
Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape requirements can
be given when preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or larger.
Mr.White indicated that it was the developer's desire to
preserve as many of the existing trees as possible and work
with the topography.
The deferral of the street improvements to Sibley Hole Road
and West Baseline Road were discussed.Bob Turner,
Director of Public Works,indicated support of the deferraltoWestBaselineRoadbutnottoSibleyHoleRoad.
Discussions were also directed toward the driveway location
on West Baseline Road.A site distance problem was a
concern raised by Public Works.Moving the driveway to theeastwouldallowforashareddrivewaysituationandwouldassistintheeliminationofthesightdistanceconcern.
Mr.White indicated he would look into moving the driveway.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PID to
the full Commission for resolution.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
October 31,2001.The revised site plan addresses most of
the issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision
5
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7106
Committee.The applicant included the hours of operation
(8 am —5 pm,Monday through Friday),the location and the
size of the proposed ground mounted sign,the location of
the dumpster and referenced any site lighting in the
general notes.
The ground mounted sign is indicated to be maximum size
allowed by the zoning ordinance for industrial zoning.Thesitelightingwillbelow-level and directed away from
residentially zoned properties.The dumpster will be
placed near the warehouse site and although,the site plan
does not include notes on screening,the ordinance requires
screening on three sides of the dumpster;either an opaque
fence or wall 8 feet in height.
The applicant has moved the driveway location on West
Baseline Road east to 220 feet from the intersection to
allow for a shared driveway with future development to theeast.This spacing will not meet the minimum requirement
for driveway spacing as set by Ordinance (300 feet).
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with the PID.The proposed PID zoning
should have no adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PID rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with paragraphs D,E and F of this report.
2.Screening be placed on three sides of the dumpster;to be
either an opaque fence or wall 8 feet in height.3.The driveway spacing on West Baseline Road be a minimum
of 300 feet from the intersection of Sibley Hole Road.
4.Staff recommends approval of the deferral of MasterStreetPlanimprovementstoWestBaselineRoad.5.Staff recommends denial of the deferral of Master Street
Plan improvements to Sibley Hole Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Joe White was present representing the applicant.There were no
objectors present.Staff informed the Commission there was one
6
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7106
letter of support received on the item from the Southwest Little
Rock United for Progress.Staff presented the item with a
recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above.Staff
informed the Commission that the developer had agreed to
construct one-half street improvements to West Baseline and
Sibley Hole Roads.
Staff also stated the applicant was in agreement to moving the
driveway entrance 300 feet to the east of the intersection of
West Baseline and Sibley Hole Roads.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 11 ayes,0 noes and
0 absent.
7
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:LU01-08-03
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Central City
Planning District
Location:2416 S.Chester Street
Rsceuest:Single Family tc Suburban Office
Source:Joyce M.Raynor
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District
from Single Family to Suburban Office.The Suburban Office
category provides 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.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently zoned R-4 Two Family and consists of a
vacant house at 2416 Chester Street,and a vacant lot at 2414
Chester Street.Combined,the applicant's property is
approximately .32+acres in size.The lots north of the
applicant's property are zoned R-4 Two Family with a house
located on the lot neighboring the applicant's property.The
vacant lots to the east lie in the Capital Zoning District and
are zoned M where Single Family and Two Family uses are
permitted.The lots south of the site under review are zoned R-
4 Two Family.The neighboring lot to the south is vacant while
houses are located on the remaining lots to the south.All of
the property to the west is zoned R-4 Two Family and consists of
houses and vacant lots.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On January 4,2000 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed
Use at 2311 S.Spring Street about a 'c mile east of the
applicant's property.
On June 15,1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed
Use and Public Institutional at Wright Avenue about 9/10 of a
mile northwest of the application area.
On June 1,1999 a change was made from Mining to Single Family,
\
November ~,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-03
Industrial,and Park/Open Space at I-30 and Arch Street about 8
of a mile southeast of the property in question.
On April 20,1999 a change was made from Commercial,Low Density
Residential,and Public Institutional to Mixed Use on Scott
Street from 16 Street to I-630 about 1 mile northeast of the
study area.
On April 20,1999 a change was made from Single Family to
Commercial on Scott Street from 17 Street to 19 Street about 1
mile northeast of the area under review.
On April 2,1999 a change was made from Multi-Family to Low
Density Residential on Arch Street from 13 Street to 15 Street
about 8 of a mile northeast of the amendment area.
On August 18,1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed
Use on the 1900 and 2000 block of Commerce Street about 1 mile
east of the review area.
The applicant's property is shown as Single Family on the Future
Land Use Plan.All of the surrounding property is shown as
Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Chester Street is shown as a Collector Street on the Master
Street Plan from Wright Avenue to Roosevelt Road.A Class III
Bikeway is shown on Chester Street from S.14 Street to
Roosevelt Road.
PARKS:
The 2001 Little Rock Park and Recreation Master Plan proposes an
eight-block strategy of providing facilities within an eight
block radius of all residential areas.The applicant's property
is located about six blocks south of Dunbar Park,which is shown
as a Neighborhood Park in the plan.This application area is
far enough away that Dunbar Park would not be greatly affected
by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant's property is located in an area covered by the
Downtown Neighborhoods Plan for the Future.The Housing Goal of
the plan contains an objective of repairing or demolishing
2
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-03
condemned houses.Four action statements support this
objective.The first statement calls for the creation of a city
policy to rehabilitate condemned houses rather than demolish
them by promoting salvage of the condemned houses.The second
action statement calls for the creation of a list and map
addresses of condemned houses to promote rehabilitation,by
publicizing the list.The list is contained in the plan's
appendix and shows the structure at 2414 Chester Street on both
the map and the list contained in the appendix.The second
action statement calls for the establishment of a city program
of incentives for repair rather than demolition.The final
action statement calls for city funding of demolishing burned
houses and public nuisance structures.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant's property is located in a stabilizing residential
neighborhood with houses oriented towards Chester Street.Most
of the Office uses in the area are located along Broadway
Street,Main Street,and Roosevelt Road.The streets where
Office uses are shown in the neighborhood are listed as either
Principal Arterials or Minor Arterials.This portion of Chester
Street is not listed as either type of arterial.A change to
Suburban Office would place isolated office uses on a collector
street in an area surrounded by residential uses.
This block was hit by the tornado of 1999.Since that time,
there have been repairs and renovations to most of the houses in
the area in addition to at least four new housing starts in the
immediate area.This reinvestment into the residential
neighborhood was made based on the area zoning and Future Land
Use Plan showing residential for this area.The City should
honor those investments by maintaining the area as residential.
A temporary non-residential use,which maintains that
residential feel and is designed to be converted back to
residential at a later date might be considered.
The property in question sits across the street from the
Governors Mansion Historic District.The historic district is
intended to preserve the neighborhood surrounding the historic
site.The purpose of the guidelines is to provide standards to
preserve the area's unique architectural heritage.However,the
applicant's property would not be affected by the regulations of
3
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-03
the historic district due to its location outside the district's
boundaries.Nevertheless,any development of this property
would need to respect the character of the surrounding
residential neighborhood.The Capital Zoning District map shows
the property across the street zoned as M where Single Family
and Two-Family uses are permitted.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association,Central High Neighborhood
Association,East of Broadway Neighborhood Association,
Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association,MLK Neighborhood
Association,South End Neighborhood Association,South End
Neighborhood Developers,and Wright Avenue Neighborhood
Association.Staff has received four comments from area
residents.None are in support,four are opposed to the change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.This amendment
would intensify possible uses in a revitalizing residential area
isolated from other compatible uses.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Donna James,City Staff,made a presentation of item
8.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for
item 8.See item 8.1 for a complete discussion concerning the
Short Form Planned Development-Office.
Ms.Joyce Raynor spoke on behalf of the application and stated
that the property would be used as an office and would not house
clients of applicant's counseling services.
Ms.Leta Anthony spoke in support of the application and stated
that the proposed services would be a clearing-house where
clients would be matched with counseling services that would be
provided at other locations.
4
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-03
Mr.Howard Sanders spoke in opposition to the application and
was opposed to the possibility of businesses moving into the
neighborhood.
Mr.Tommy Brown spoke in opposition to the application and
stated that Commercial real estate was available outside the
neighborhood that would fit the applicant's needs.
Ms.Erma Hendrix spoke in opposition to the application and
stated concerns about the notification procedures and added that
she was able to talk to property owners within three hundred
feet of the applicant's property after receiving a notification
card from the City of Little Rock.Ms.Hendrix collected
signatures from residents opposed to the application and
presented them to the Planning Commission.
Ms.Louise Bullocks spoke in opposition to the application
stating that it would not improve the neighborhood.
Bishop L.T.Walker spoke in opposition to the application
stating that he did not want to see the character of the
neighborhood disturbed.
Mr.Lee Hill spoke in opposition to the application and cited
potential traffic problems.
Ms.Phyllis Brown spoke in opposition to the application and
stated that services similar to those proposed by the applicant
were already available within the city.
A discussion took place between the commission,city staff,the
applicant,and the opposition about the support and opposition
to the services proposed by the applicant.
Commissioner Rohn Muse asked if the Downtown Neighborhood Plan
for the Future supported the proposed project.Jim Lawson,
Planning Director,stated that the Goals and Objectives
described in the staff report did not designate a specific area
for the Goals and Objectives mentioned.Walter Malone,Planning
Manager,stated that the neighborhood action plan supported the
reuse and rehabilitation of residential units in the
neighborhood.
5
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-08-03
Commissioner Judith Faust asked where a copy of the list and map
of condemned houses mentioned in the staff report might be
located.Brian Minyard stated that the list was located in an
appendix of the neighborhood action plan.
A discussion took place among the commissioners,applicant,and
the opposition about the possibility of working toward a
compromise on the issue.The applicant wanted a compromise that
would allow the proposed project to move forward.
Planning Commission Chairman,Richard Downing,wanted the
property owner to speak concerning the sale of the property in
question to the applicant.David Featherdon,the property
owner,stated that he supported the uses proposed by the
applicant and believed that the applicant represented a good
cause.
Further discussion took place between the commission and the
opposition concerning the effect of the proposed use on the
neighborhood and what would make the applicant's proposal
acceptable to the neighborhood.
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.
6
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:8.1 FILE NO.:Z-7107
NAME:Center for Healing Hearts and Spirits Short-Form PD-0
LOCATION:2416 South Chester Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Joyce Rayner Troy Laha
P.O.Box 661 6202 Baseline Road
Little Rock,AR 72203 Little Rock,AR 72209
AREA:0.16+Acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
CURRENT ZONING:R-4 two-family
ALLOWED USES:Single-family and two-family residences.
PROPOSED ZONING:PD-0 PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property located at
2416 S.Chester Street from R-4 two-family to PD-0 to
utilize the existing single-family residential structure as
an office to provide education and referral services to
clients.The office staff will administer a community
awareness program for victims and family of victims of
violent crimes and terminal illnesses.The property will
not provide housing for any clients,but will be utilized
as office space only.
The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be Monday
through Friday from 8 am to 5 pm.There will be 2.5
individuals employed by the Center.Volunteer services
November 1.=2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
will also be utilized in providing services.Parking will
be accessed via the alley.Because most services provided
by the Center will be on an individual basis in-house,via
telephone,off-site counseling,off-site home visitations
and minimal group sessions (3-6 individuals),traffic in
and out of the property will be minimal.This single-use
PD-0 is for this use only and will not be transferable to
any other use.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an exiting,vacant,single-family
structure.The area is in the path of the tornado and is
characterized by the large number of vacant lots and homes
in disrepair or,in some cases,new construction of homes.
There are three vacant lots to the north of the site and
one to the south.The four lots directly across the street
are also vacant.There is a new duplex located on the
northwest corner of S.Chester Street and Roosevelt Road.
The area to the west of the site is predominately single-
family with the exception of a duplex located directly
behind the proposed site.
The lot slopes downward from S.Chester Street to the rear.
There is an existing parking pad,which extends from S.
Chester Street along the north side of the house.The lot
has been raised and leveled mid-way back with a significant
grade change to the alley.There is a three-foot retaining
wall separating the grade change with a large mature tree
located on the high side of the grade change.In addition,
there are the remnants of an out building located on the
back property line.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received two informationalcallsconcerningthisapplication.All property owners
within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet
of the site who could be identified and the Downtown
Neighborhood Association,Martin Luther King Neighborhood
Association,Nright Avenue Neighborhood Association and
Southend Neighborhood Developers were notified of the
Public Hearing.
2
November 1 .2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entercny:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No comment received.
Water:No objection.
Fire De artment:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No comment received.
CATA:Project site is located near Bus Routes ¹2 and ¹15
but has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Central City Planning
District.The Land Use Plan indicates Single-Family for
this property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Development Office for a non-profit educational and
referral organization.The property is currently zoned R-4
two-family.A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to
Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda.
3
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The area lies in the Downtown Neighborhoods Action Plan
area.There are three (3)statements mentioned in the plan
which are related to this activity.Increase small
business development.Promote re-use of 64 properties
unsold at delinquent tax auctions,whose back taxes totaled
$175,000 in a check of records held by the Arkansas Land
Commissioner.The Housing Goal supports the preservation
and rehabilitation of existing housing to create a diverse
and demographically representative neighborhood to provide
a feeling of security in the area and spur economic
development.
Landsca e Issues:
A minimum 6.7-foot wide land use buffer is required along
the northern and southern perimeters of the site by the
Zoning Ordinance.The landscape ordinance also requires
the same minimum 6.7-foot wide landscape strip north and
south of the new vehicular use area.The plan submitted
does not comply with these requirements.
Buildin Codes:
1.Add a handicap ramp (suggested placement in the front)
to allow for accessibility with a minimum slope of
1 and 12.
2.Designate the front driveway as a handicap space with a
minimum width of 16 feet.
3.One interior restroom should comply with ADA
requirements.
4.The applicant will be required to obtain a building
permit for these and other interior remodels.
Contact Mark Whitaker at 371-4839 for details.
A 6-foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings,is
required along the northern and southern perimeters of thesite.
November 1.:2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Ms.Joyce Rayner and Mr.Troy Laha were present,
representing the application.Staff briefly described the
proposed PD-O.Staff noted that additional notes needed to
be shown on the site plan.
Staff also indicated the desire for the structure to remain
residential in character.Staff suggested the applicant
move the parking to the rear and be accessed by the alley.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.
Mr.Laha indicated he would work with Public Works on these
issues.
Landscaping requirements were discussed.Staff indicated a
minimum of 6.7 —foot wide landscape strip along the north
and south property lines would be required which was not
indicated on the site plan.A 6-foot high opaque screen is
required along the southern and northern property lines
adjacent to the residentially zoned properties.After
consideration,it was determined the extension of screening
beyond the rear of the structure was not in keeping with
the landscaping in the area and would change the character
of the structure.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-0 to
the full Commission for resolution.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
October 30,2001.The revised site plan addresses the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The landscaped areas are shown on the site plan along with
the proposed signage.
The applicant proposes a 3 foot by 3 foot ground mounted
sign in the front yard area.This conforms to the
ordinance requirements for office signage.Staff is
agreeable with the sign as proposed.
The revised site plan also shows the areas of landscaping
upgrades as required in paragraph F.of this report.A 6.5
5
November 1.2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
foot landscape strip of shrubs will he put into place for
screening adjacent to the vehicular parking area on the
north and south property lines to the rear of building.
Staff feels the applicant has done an above average job in
addressing the site design issues associated with this
property,given the fact that the property is very small in
size.The desire is for the site to remain residential in
character,which the applicant has accomplished by
accessing parking from the alley.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with the PD-O.The proposed PD-0 zoning
should have no adverse impact on the general area.
I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PD-0 rezoning request
subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
The applicant was present.There were seven objectors present.
The item was discussed concurrently with Item ¹8,LU01-08-03,a
Land Use Plan amendment.
Staff presented the proposed plan amendment.Staff then
presented the PZD and recommended approval subject to compliance
with the Conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"
above.
Ms.Joyce Raynor indicated the property would be used solely as
an office use.She stated the program was to provide education
and referral to victims of violent crimes and terminal
illnesses;this site would not house clients;they will be
going out more than clients will be coming in;and identifying
services for clients was the primary function of the Center.
Ms.Leta Anthony,Co-founder and President of the Women'
Council of African American Affairs,stated services are not
6
November 1 ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
available to the under served citizens of the community.She
stated the reason these centers are located in neighborhoods is
because that is where the needs are and the underserved
community does not know where to go to get these services.Ms.
Anthony stated the Center will serve as a clearinghouse to match
clients to services and the physical location is solely to have
an address to provide services,which have been taking place in
members'omes.She stated she saw this as an opportunity to
serve the human capital.
Mr.Harold Sanders spoke in opposition.He stated he has lived
in the area for several years and has made a significant
investment in the area.He stated he has constructed a duplex
located on the corner of Roosevelt Road and Chester Street.He
also stated he has a home based business but from the
neighborhood it appears residential because there is no traffic
to his business.
Mr.Tommy Brown spoke in opposition.He indicated his supportforMs.Raynor and her objective but felt the use was not
conducive to the neighborhood.He felt there were areas,which
could be used for this activity and would not be in residential
neighborhoods.He stated the alley has suspect activity and
additional traffic into the alley would create more problems.
Erma Hendrix also spoke in opposition to the proposal and voiced
the following concerns:The applicant does not live in the area
and the residents question why they chose not to put the project
in their area;The Board Members contacted which were listed on
the letterhead knew nothing about the project;The letter sent
to residents inferred the Police Department was in cooperation.
Ms.Hendrix stated she had visited with the Office of the Police
Chief and there is no record of the commitment from their
Department.Ms.Hendrix also had a letter from a State
Legislator in opposition to the project.She stated the group
never visited with the neighbors.Ms.Hendrix stated a concern
about who was to receive the certified notices and many did not.
get the notices but did a get notice from staff.She stated she
was grateful to Quapaw Quarter and Capitol Zoning for theirlettersinsupportofpreservingtheneighborhood.Ms.Hendrix
presented petitions with signatures of persons in the
neighborhood who oppose the project at this location.
Ms.Louise Bullocks addressed the Commission and indicated she
had lived in the area for over 75 years.She stated the
7
November 1.2001
\
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
neighborhood has been coming back and there are still things in
the neighborhood,which are not great,but bringing this element
into the neighborhood could have a negative impact.
Bishop L.T.Walker stated he has been moved two times as a
result of Philander Smith College.He stated he moved to 2315
Chester Street and it appears this will require him to move once
again.He stated he has lived in the city for 81 years and he
would like to see the neighborhood preserved.
Lee Hill spoke in opposition to the application.He stated he
would be directly affected by the project since his house is
located adjacent to the alley going southbound which will be
utilized to access the parking area.He stated this is not the
proper place to locate this activity.Mr.Hill stated there is
a problem in that the applicant did not meet with the
neighborhood prior to the submission of the application andtrafficsafety,ingress and egress are a concern.Mr.Hill
stated the alley to Roosevelt Road is extremely dangerous.Mr.
Hill provided pictures to the Commission indicating the sight
distance problems at the intersection.Mr.Hill indicated a lot
of funds had been spent on rehabilitation of homes after the
tornado.Back to traffic he said,there is a no left turn on
Chester Street at Roosevelt Road and a check with AHTD indicated
15,000 cars per day on Roosevelt Road.He stated he wanted to
preserve the residential character of the area and the use would
be better served by placing the Center in a commercially zoned
area of the city.
Phyllis Brown,an employee of the City of Little Rock in the911-call center,spoke in opposition of the application.She
stated the Police Department has a victim's services division,
which reaches out to everyone regardless of color who has been a
victim of crime.She stated education is also offered through
the Police Department and for treatment of terminal illnesses,
there is Hospis,Hospitals and Churches that can reach out to
people who need services.She stated she did not want to see a
parking lot or a marquee when leaving her home reminding her
that this was not a residential use.
Commissioner Lowry asked Ms.Hendrix the number of signatures on
the petition.She stated between 75 and 100.Commissioner
Lowry then asked the feeling of the neighborhood.She stated
they were against the location and that was the reason the
residents signed the petition.
8
November 1 2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
Commissioner Nunnley questioned Ms.Raynor as to the rational
behind picking this location.She stated the Council had been
looking for over two years for a house to locate the facility.
She contacted someone in the area who owned property and askedifheknewofalocation.He indicated this site was available
and he would donate a portion of the property value to the
council.
Ms.Raynor also addressed the question of notification
indicating she notified property owners within two-hundred feet
as required and all the neighborhood associations in the area
giving the purpose of the Center and the services provided and a
phone number for anyone to call with questions.She stated only
one person had called with questions.She also stated not
everyone "picked-up"his or her notices from the Post Office.
Commissioner Muse questioned the statement in the staff write-up
concerning the Downtown Neighborhoods Action Plan with regard to
Economic Development.Walter Malone,of the Planning Staff,
indicated small business development in the area was not
specified.He noted through out the area there were numerous
non-residential structures,which were identified and in his
opinion,those structures would be the neighborhood's first
choice for non-residential activities.He stated there was a
desire to increase the number of residences in the area,which
would indicate they would not be in favor of converting a
residential structure into a non-residential use.
Commissioner Berry questioned Bob Turner,Director of Public
Works,regarding the street width in the area.Mr.Turner
stated the width was a standard four-lane roadway.Mr.Turner
agreed there was a sight distance problem on Chester Street at
Roosevelt Road.Mr.Turner also stated it was deemed advisable
to use the alleyway to keep traffic off Chester Street.
There was a lengthy discussion concerning if the two parties
could work through the issues and come to an agreement on how
the two could locate together.Ms.Anthony stated her group
would be willing to meet with the neighborhood and try to reach
a compromise.Ms.Hendrix stated her group would be willing toassistwithfindinganewlocationbutnotfortheCenterto
locate in the area.
9
November 1 —2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
Commissioner Downing asked Ms.Raynor the type corporation and
funding mechanisms the Center operated under.Ms Raynor stated
the Center was a 501 c 3 corporation and the Center operates on
donations from individuals.In the future,she stated,the
Center will apply for grants to assist in operations.Ms.
Raynor stated location was important for staff to get to the
victims,but the facility was for an administrative office only.
Ms.Raynor stated the Center has been in existence for three
years operating from member's homes.She stated the Center was
not modeled from any other program she was aware of.
Commissioner Nunnley stated a concern of the lack of
communication between the neighbors and the applicant and stated
he saw preservation of neighborhoods as a key component of the
City.
Mr.Jim Lawson,Planning Staff,indicated there were four to
five structures which were "gone"as a result of the tornado.
He stated the map in the package did not indicate this and it
appeared there were more structures in the area than are in fact
there.In the future,he stated,staff will indicate the
structures which are no longer there by "x-ing"through the non-
existent structures.
Chairman Downing stated two years ago the Commission spoke of
mixed-use developments and urban sprawl.He questioned how the
neighborhood was being destroyed with the placement of an office
in the area.He stated the office would be used for
administrative purposes only.He stated not allowing infill
development would further urban sprawl.Chairman Downing statedifthesignistheissue,then remove the sign.
Mr.Lawson stated the key to smart growth is to revitalize areas
in ways that could convert back to single-family.He stated
that through the PD-0 the City can support the application and
begin to revitalize the area.
Commissioner Lowry asked Ms.Raynor if she could limit the
number of employees to three,remove the sign,offer no client
group counseling on the premise,only offer client in-take
services,end hours at the Center at 5:00 pm and have no one
coming into the Center for counseling.Ms.Raynor agreed to
these conditions.
10
November —,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7107
Commissioner Lowry made the motion to approve the Land Use
application as filed,Item ¹8.The vote failed 0 ayes,11 noes
and 0 absent.
Commissioner Lowry made the motion to approve Item ¹8.1 the PD-0
recpxest as filed including staff comments and recommendations
including limiting the number of employees to three,removing
the sign as agreed to by the applicant and that there be no in
house group counseling as agreed to by the applicant.
The vote passed 9 ayes,0 noes,0 absent and 2 abstentions (Norm
Floyd and Obray Nunnley).
11
November 15,2001
ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:S-1327
NAME:Healthy Lawns and Shrubs Inc.—Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION:On the West side of Westpark Drive,approximately 450feetSouthofWest12Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Healthy Lawns and Shrubs McGetrick &McGetrick
P.O.Box 56499 319 E.Markham StreetLittleRock,AR 72215 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:1.445+acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:I-2 ALLOWED USES:Industrial
PROPOSED USE:Expansion of existing use.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None recpxested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The property is zoned I-2 and contain an existing
structures used by Healthy Lawns and Shrubs.Healthy Lawns
and Shrubs is an existing lawn care center located on West
12 Street,west of Westpark Drive.The existing building
and the proposed new building will be used as a shop and
storage space of material and equipment and supplies by the
company.
This application is for multiple buildings on a single site
and must go through multiple building site plan review bythePlanningCommission.
The applicant proposes the construction of a 500 squarefootbuildingneartheeastpropertylinewithinanexistingconcrete/asphalt area.The applicant notes that
the exterior of the new storage building will match the
November —,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1327
existing building.Please see the attached site plan for
the proposed building location.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is accessed via Vogler Street from West 12
Street.The site contains an existing building used by
Healthy Lawns and Shrubs as storage.Other areas of the
site contain open storage of lawn materials;plants,
composting materials,mulching materials and items that
have been removed and are waiting to be shredded for
composting.The parking area is currently gravel and
concrete.The site has fencing on all sides.To the east,
adjacent to the rear of office/warehouse uses fronting West
Park Drive,the fence is a six-foot wooden fence.To the
south and west the fence is a six-foot chain link fence.A
concrete plant is located to the west of the site and the
Rock Creek floodway borders the southern boundary of the
property.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.All property owners within 200 feet of thesiteandtheUniversityParkNeighborhoodAssociationand
the Broadmoor Neighborhood Association were notified of the
Public Hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.5.Dedicate regulatory floodway to City of Little Rock.See
Mel Hall for floodway line determination.
6.A grading permit and development permit for special flood
hazard area is required prior to construction.
2
November .—,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1327
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entercnr:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comment received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges in this area.The Little Rock
Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine
whether additional fire protection is required.On sitefireprotectionoranadditionalpublicfirehydrantmay
be required.The work would be done at the expense of
the developer.
Fire De artment:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin No comment received.
CATA:Project site is located near Bus Route ¹3 and has
no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No comment.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The property lies in the Boyle Park Neighborhood Action
Plan area.The Plan was completed in early 2001 and was
not presented to the Planning Commission or the Board of
Directors because there was no "Champion"of the Plan to
bring it forward.An Objective stated in the Plan is to
protect the residential integrity of the neighborhood by
maintaining adequate separation or sufficient buffering
between residential and non-residential uses.
Landsca e Issues:
A 6-foot high opaque wood fence with its face side directed
outward is required along the southern perimeter of the site.
3
November .,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1327
Buildin Codes:
Submit a full set of plans to building codes for review and
permitting.Contact Mark Whitaker at 371-4839 for details.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(October 25,2001)
Pat,McGetrick was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the proposed site plan and noted
that some additional project information was needed.
Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.
Mr.McGetrick indicated he would work with Public Works to
resolve these issues.
The landscaping requirements were briefly discussed.It
was noted that a 6-foot high opaque wood fence with its
face side directed outward is required along the southern
perimeter of the site.Concern was raised over the
floodway line and the placement of a wooden fence in the
floodway.Mr.McGetrick indicted he would work with Public
Works to determine the floodway line determination for this
property.
After discussion,the Committee forwarded the site plan to
the full Commission for final action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
October 31,2001.The revised site plan addresses the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The proposed hours of operation are 8 am to 5 pm,Monday
through Friday.There will be approximately five (5)
employees located on this site.The existing building
height is 18 feet and the proposed building height is 25feet.There are no new signs and there will not be a
dumpster located as a result of this project.Anyadditionallightingwillbeonthebuilding.The applicant
has indicated a fence or landscape barrier will be
constructed on the south side of the property.
4
November ,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1327
The proposed new maintenance and storage building conforms
to the minimum setback and height requirements as set forth
by the City'Zoning Ordinance.Therefore,there should be
no outstanding issues associated with the proposed site
plan.The proposed plan should have no adverse impact on
the general area.
I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the site plan subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 15,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted
a letter on November 12,2001 requesting deferral to the
November 29,2001 public hearing.The applicant failed to
notify abutting property owners within the required time.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent.
5
'I
Adopte~November 15,2001
PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR -2002
SUBDIVISION HEARINGS:
Subdivision
~Fille Date ~te a(Ad Committee (2)HHearinl Date (t)(3)
11-19-01 11-30-01 12-06-01 01-03-02
01-07-02 01-18-02 01-24-02 02-14-02
02-19-02 03-01-02 03-07-02 03-28-02
04-01-02 04-12-02 04-18-02 05-09-02
05-13-02 05-24-02 05-30-02 06-20-02
06-24-02 07-05-02 07-18-02 08-08-02
08-12-02 08-23-02 08-29-02 09-19-02
09-23-02 10-04-02 10-10-02 10-31-02
11-04-02 11-15-02 11-21-02 12-19-02
12-23-02 01-03-03 01-16-03 02-07-03
PLANNING —REZONING —CONDITIONAL USE HEARINGS:
Subdivision
~Fille Date ~te a(Ad Committee (2)HHearin l Date (t)(3)
12-03-01 12-19-01 12-20-01 12-05-01 12-1 9-01 01-02-02 01-17-02
01-22-02 02-06-02 02-07-02 01-23-02 02-06-02 02-20-02 02-28-02
03-04-02 03-20-02 03-21-02 03-06-02 03-20-02 04-03-02 04-11-02
04-15-02 05-01-02 05-02-02 04-17-02 05-01-02 05-15-02 05-23-02
05-28-02 06-12-02 06-13-02 05-29-02 06-12-02 06-26-02 07-11-02
07-15-02 07-31-02 08-01-02 07-17-02 07-31-02 08-14-02 08-22-02
08-26-02 09-11-02 09-12-02 08-28-02 09-11-02 09-25-02 10-03-02
10-07-02 10-23-02 10-24-02 10-09-02 10-23-02 11-06-02 11-14-02
11-18-02 12-04-02 12-12-02 11-20-02 12-04-02 12-18-02 01-09-03
AVAILABLE INFORMAL MEETING DATES:
(to be scheduled as required)
MMeetin i Date (5)
01-31-02
03-14-02
04-25-02
06-06-02
07-25-02
09-05-02
10-17-02
12-05-02
01-23-03
NOTE:(1)All public Hearings shall be held at 4:00 P.M.unless otherwise changed by the Commission.
(2)All meetings shall be held at 12:00 P.M.unless changed by the Subdivision Committee,
(3)An agenda meeting will be held prior to each public hearing date and will begin at 3:30 P.M.in the Sister Cities
Conference Room.
(4)Reserved.
(5)All informal meetings shall be held at 3:30 P.M.unless otherwise changed by the Commission.
(6)All meetings shall be held at 12:00 NOON unless otherwise changed by the Plans Committee.
NOTICE:AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON REQUEST.REQUEST SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR
TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE.
P
L
A
N
N
I
N
G
C
O
M
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
V
O
T
E
R
E
C
O
R
D
D
A
T
E
'
J
.
s
~
e
x
)
i
o
&
r
Z
.
w
g
R
E
.
C
U
L
~
R
I
I
E
M
B
E
R
2
.
I
o
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
B
I
L
L
,
'
0
0
v
0
D
O
W
N
I
N
G
,
R
I
C
H
A
R
D
e
w
v
F
L
O
Y
D
,
N
O
R
M
e
O
a
N
U
N
N
L
E
Y
,
O
B
R
A
Y
e
e
~
B
E
R
R
Y
,
C
R
A
I
G
S
T
E
B
B
I
N
S
,
R
O
B
E
R
T
u
'
e
0
A
$
R
A
H
M
A
N
,
M
I
Z
A
N
e
0
&
v
L
O
W
R
Y
,
B
O
B
o
0
&
e
A
L
L
E
N
,
F
R
E
D
,
J
R
.
0
0
~
v
F
A
U
S
T
,
J
U
D
I
T
H
o
o
~
M
U
S
E
,
R
O
H
N
v
~
o
0
y
~
U
t
.
v
K
R
e
e
.
)
r
s
v
p
7
M
E
M
B
E
R
C
.
t
'
R
E
C
T
O
R
,
B
I
L
L
v
'
"
D
O
W
N
I
N
G
,
R
I
C
H
A
R
D
0
F
L
O
Y
D
,
N
O
R
M
N
U
N
N
L
E
Y
,
O
B
R
A
Y
B
E
R
R
Y
,
C
R
A
I
G
0
S
T
E
B
B
I
N
S
,
R
O
B
E
R
T
o
R
A
H
M
A
N
,
M
I
Z
A
N
L
O
W
R
Y
,
B
O
B
A
L
L
E
N
,
F
R
E
D
,
J
R
.
F
A
U
S
T
,
J
U
D
I
T
H
M
U
S
E
,
R
O
H
N
e
a
r
'
e
e
t
i
n
g
A
d
j
o
u
r
n
e
d
5
P
.
M
.
t
A
Y
E
N
A
Y
E
A
A
B
S
E
N
T
A
5
A
B
S
T
A
I
N
~
R
E
C
U
S
E
November 15,2001
SUBDIVISION MINUTES
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m.
/-s-oz
Date
Chairman S e ary