pc_11 29 2001LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING —REZONING —CONDITIONAL USE BEARING
MINUTE RECORD
NOVEMBER 29,2001
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being ten (10)in number.
II.Members Present:Richard Downing
Judith Faust
Craig Berry
Bob Lowry
Fred Allen,Jr.
Robert Stebbins
Norm Floyd
Mizan RahmanBillRector
Rohn Muse
Members Absent:Obray Nunnley,Jr.
City Attorney:Steve Giles
III.Approval of the Minutes of the October 18,2001 Meeting of
the Little Rock Planning Commission.The Minutes were
approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING —REZONING —CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
NOVEMBER 2 9 ~200 1
4:00 P.M.
I.DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.LU01-19-06 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning
District from Single Family to Commercial
B.Z-7096 Lot 61,Maumelle Orchard Addition R-2 to C-3
East side of Chenal Parkway,
South of Cantrell Road
C.Z-7093 Holy Temple Church of God in Christ —C.U.P.
1315 S.Pulaski Street
D.S-1326 Mystery Woods Addition —Preliminary Plat
North of the intersection of West 57 Street and
Freeland Drive
E.S-1327 Healthy Lawns and Shrubs —Subdivision Site
Plan Review
Located on the west side of Westpark Drive
approximately 450 feet south of West 12 Street
II.NEW ITEMS:
1.Z-3252-A 7200 Geyer Springs Road 0-3 to O-l
2.Z-7111 McGinister Day Care Family Home
Special Use Permit
3400 Walker Street
3.Z-5237-A Watson Elementary School —C.U.P.
7000 Valley Drive
4.Z-5460-A Brady Elementary School —C.U.P.
7915 West Markham Street
5.Z-6762-B Lot 3,Hampton-Golf Subdivision —Revised C.U.P.
1219 S.Shackleford Road
6.Z-7004-A Kanis Plaza Muffler Shop —C.U.P.
10901 Kanis Road
Agenda,Page Two
II.NEW ITEMS:(Cont.)
7.Z-7097 Penick Boys Club —C.U.P.
1201 Leisure Place
8.Z-7110 Crystal Volunteer Fire Department —C.U.P.
17325 Lawson Road
9.Z-4423-E Wal-Mart —C.U.P.
700 S.Bowman Road
10.G-25-183-A Lee Avenue Name Change to Father Tribou Street
Lee Avenue,west of University Avenue
11.G-25-184 1-430/Colonel Glenn Commercial Subdivision
Street Name Change
Southwest corner of I-430 and Colonel Glenn Road
12.G-23-311 Ferry Street —Right-of-Way Abandonment
Between East 3 and East 4 Streets
13.G-23-312 Jonesboro Drive —Right-of-Way Abandonment
Between S.Monroe Street and Zoo Drive
14.LU01-14-01 Land Use Plan Amendments in the Geyer Springs East
and and Geyer Springs West Planning Districts
LU01-15-01
15.Midtown Neighborhoods Plan
Nove..er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:LU01-19-06
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Chenal Planning District
Location:East side of Chenal Parkway about 570 feet south of
Cantrell Road.
R~t:R'l y 'ly to Co *'
Source:James T.Berry
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District from
Single Family to Commercial.The Commercial category includes a
broad range of retail and 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 develop the
property for commercial uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is vacant land currently zoned R-2 Single Family andisapproximately5.0+acres in size.All of the surrounding
property is vacant land.The land to the north is zoned C-3
General Commercial while the land to the east and south is zoned
R-2 Single Family.The land to the west is zoned C-2 Shopping
Center and C-3 General Commercial.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On March 6,2001 a change was made from Single Family to
Commercial at the 19900 Block of Highway 10 about 1/3 of a mile
Northwest of the applicant's property.
On June 20,2000 a change was made from Mixed Office Commercial
to Commercial at the 17800 —17900 blocks of Cantrell Road about
1 mile East of the site in question.
On November 16,1999 a change was made from Single Family to
Office at 6400 Patrick Country Road about 1 mile Northeast of the
application site.
On October 5,1999 a change was made from Office to Mixed Office
Commercial on Cantrell Road at Patrick Country Road about 1 mile
East of the area under review.
On July 21,1998 a change was made from Single Family to Single
Family,Office and Multi-Family at 18600 Cantrell Road about 2/3ofamileEastoftheareainquestion.
Novemter 29,2001
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-06
On July 21,1998 a change was made from Single Family to OfficeatChenalParkwayandStateHighway300about4cofamile
Northwest of the amendment area.
On April 15,1997 a change was made from Single Family,Office,
and Existing Business Node to Public Institutional,Suburban
Office and Multi-Family at Cantrell and Patrick Country Road
about 1/10 of a mile Northeast of the property in question.
The applicant's property is shown as Single Family on the Future
Land Use Plan.The property to the north is shown as Commercial.
The property to the east and south is shown as Single Family.
The property to the west is shown as Public Intuitional and
Commercial.There is a strip of Park/Open Space shown on both
sides of Chenal Parkway.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
The Master Street Plan shows Chenal Parkway as a PrincipalArterial.A Class I Bikeway is shown for this portion of Chenal
Parkway linking Bowman Road to State Highway 10.Any developmentofthispropertywillbesubjecttohalfstreetimprovements.
PARKS:
There are no parks or open spaces shown on the 2001 Little Rock
Parks and Recreation Master Plan that would be affected by this
amendment.
Cit Reco nised Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in an area not covered by a city
recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant's property lies in a developing area near the
Highway 10 Design Overlay District.Even thought the applicant's
propezty is not located in the overlay district,development of
the applicant's property will be affected by the strip of
Park/Open Space located on both sides of Chenal Parkway.ThestripofPark/Open Space on Chenal Parkway is directly connected
to the strip of Park/Open Space on State Highway 10 at the Chenal
Parkway /Highway 10 intersection.There is a desire shown bythePlantobringtheOverlayfrontyardlandscapeandsetback
concepts down Chenal Parkway.
2
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-06
A combined total of 46.80+acres of vacant land shown as
Commercial already forms a node at the Chenal Parkway /Highway
10 intersection.The convenience store located at the northwest
corner of the intersection is the only developed commercial use
in the area while the remainder of the land shown as Commercial
remains vacant.The vacant land shown as Commercial demonstrates
a lack of demand for Commercial uses at the Chenal Parkway /
Highway 10 intersection.The need for new land shown as
Commercial at this location has not been demonstrated.
This application would expand the availability of land shown as
Commercial adjacent to land shown as residential without making
provision for a buffer between incompatible uses.A change to
Commercial would allow zone changes that would not require
dialogue between the applicant and city staff that would result
from the site plan process required by Planned Development
applications.The zone changes that might result from this
application would not require the provision of a buffer between
the incompatible uses of Commercial and Single Family.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association,Bayonne Place
Property Owners Association,Carriage Creek Property Owners
Association,Eagle Pointe Property Owners Association,Glen
Eagles Property Owners Association,Hillsborough Property Owners
Association,Hunters Cove Property Owners Association,Hunters
Green Property Owners Association,Johnson Ranch Neighborhood
Association,Marlowe Manor Property Owners Association,and St.
Charles Property Owners Association.Staff has received no
comments from area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.There appears to
be abundant undeveloped commercial land in this area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 18,2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.
3
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-06
Mazy Dornhoffez spoke in opposition to the application.Ms.
Dornhoffer expressed concerns that the scenic quality of the
State Highway 10 Corridor be maintained and that the proposed
change would harm the environmental qualities of the surrounding
area.
A motion was made to defer the item to the November 29,2001
Planning Commission Meeting and was approved with a vote of 8
ayes,1 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The amended application makes a request for three different land
use changes.The first amended request is a land use change from
Single Family to Commercial.The western area is from the
original application and the eastern area is expanded.The
second amended request is for a land use change from Single
Family to Suburban Office and is located on the east side of
Chenal Parkway and immediately south of the original applicationarea.The Suburban Office category shall provide for lowintensitydevelopmentofofficeorofficeparksinclose
proximity to lower density residential areas to assure
compatibility.A Planned Zoning District is required.The third
amended request is for a land use change from Single Family to
Park/Open Space and is located southeast of the original
application area.The proposed Park/Open Space consists of ahilltoplocatedbetweenthetwolargeelectricaltransmissionlines.To the east are the houses located in Aberdeen Court
The amended application is bounded on three sides by areas shown
as Single Family.A strip of Park/Open Space is shown on both
sides of Chenal Parkway and at the intersection of Chenal and
Cantrell Road.The land at all four corners of Chenal and
Cantrell is shown as Commercial.An area southwest of theoriginalapplicationattheendofBouresseDriveisshown as
Single Family.
The zoning of the amended application is split between C-3
General Commercial at the Chenal Parkway/Cantrell Road
intersection and R-2 Single Family to the south along Chenal
Parkway.
The proposed zoning is 0-2,Office and Institutional District,
4
Noven~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-06
for the area proposed to be Suburban Office,The request for
Suburban Office would provide a transition between the more
intense uses at the Chenal /Cantrell intersection and the
surrounding less intense uses along Chenal Parkway.
The request for Park/Open Space would serve as a buffer between
the uses of Commercial and Suburban Office to the west and the
Single Family uses in the Aberdeen Court area located to the
east.The request for Park/Open Space would also correspond with
the applicant'desire to buffer the Aberdeen Court Property
Owners Association with 14.26 acres of OS Open Space zoning.
This application would preserve the forested hilltop through the
PK/OS and OS zoning.6.0 acres of the area consists of utility
transmission lines along the eastern boundary.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the changes are appropriate since they allow for a
better transition from commercial to single family than the
current plan in an area with several constraints most notably two
major power transmission lines.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Monte Moore made a presentation of item B so the
discussion could coincide with the discussion for item A.See
item B for a complete discussion concerning the zoning
application regarding the zoning change from R-2 Single Family to
C-3 General Commercial,0-2 Office and Institutional,and OS Open
Space.
Tim Daters spoke on behalf of the application.
Tom Draper,representing the Duquesne Property Owners
Association,spoke in opposition to the application and expressed
concerns about the effect new commercial development and the
accompanying traffic would be on the area.
A motion was made to approve the item as presented.The item was
approved with a vote of 7 ayes,3 noes,and 1 absent.
5
Novs er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:Z"7096
Owner:James T.Berry
Applicant:White-Daters and Associates
Location:East side of Chenal Parkway,
approximately 570 feet south of
Cantrell Road
Request:Rezone f'rom R-2 to C-3
Purpose:Future commercial development
Size:5 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Undeveloped;zoned C-3
South —Undeveloped;zoned R-2
East —Undeveloped;zoned R-2
West —Undeveloped;zoned R-2
A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Show legal access to the property.
With Buildin Permit:
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.
4.Grading permit will be required on this development.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
C.PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site
as well as the Aberdeen Court,Bayonne Place and Duguesne
Place Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
proposed rezoning.There were no residents within 300 feetofthesitetonotify.
D.LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Chenal Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this area.The
applicant has applied for C-3 zoning.A Land Use Plan
Amendment has been filed and is a separate item on this
agenda.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant'property lies in an area not covered by acityrecognizedneighborhoodactionplan.
E.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request before the Commission is to rezone this
undeveloped,wooded,5-acre tract from R-2 Single Family
Residential District to C-3 General Commercial District.No
immediate development has been proposed for the site.This
rezoning request is associated with a Land Use Plan
Amendment,LU01-19-06 (Item 3.on this agenda).
The 5 acre tract,which appears to be land-locked,is
located along the east side of Chenal Parkway,approximately
570 feet south of Cantrell Road.Staff is not sure how the
applicant is to gain legal access to the property,as thereisanotherR-2 zoned piece of property between this tract
and Chenal Parkway.
There is a large amount of undeveloped commercial zoned
property in this immediate area of the intersection of
Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road.There are approximately18.5 acres of undeveloped C-3 zoned property immediately
2
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
north of this site along the south side of Cantrell Road
(southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway).
There is also approximately 26.5 acres of undeveloped C-3
zoned property across Chenal Parkway to the west,at the
southwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road.Thereisapproximately4acresofundevelopedC-2 zoned propertyatthesouthwestcornerofChenalParkwayandNorthfield
Drive.Additionally,there is somewhere in the vicinity of
16 acres of undeveloped C-2/C-3 zoned property within the
Northwest Territory Subdivision located on the north side of
Cantrell Road at Chenal Parkway.
There is a strip of undeveloped R-2 zoned property
immediately west of this site,between this property and
Chenal Parkway.There is a large amount of undeveloped R-2
zoned property immediately south and east of this site.The
Aberdeen Court single family neighborhood is located to the
southeast,with the DuQuesne Place single family
neighborhood being located to the southwest across Chenal
Parkway.
Staff is not supportive of the requested C-3 zoning for this
location.The Chenal District Land Use Plan recommends
Single Family for this site and the larger areas to the
south and east.As noted previously,there is a large
amount of available,undeveloped commercial zoned (C-2 and
C-3)land at each of the corners of the intersection of
Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway,two (2)principalarterials.Staff does not believe this rezoning is
appropriate given the availability of undeveloped,
commercial zoned property in the area.
Additionally,staff is not in favor of moving the south line
of the C-3 zoned property along the south side of Cantrell
Road (southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway)
further to the south into an area which could possible be
used as a transitional area in the future.This property is
located between the C-3 zoned property to the north and
single family neighborhoods to the southeast and southwest.Staff feels that if this property is not developed as single
family in the future,it could possibly prove to be an
appropriate area of transition (multifamily or quiet office)
between the commercial zoning along Cantrell Road and the
single family neighborhoods to the south.
3
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 18,2001)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.There were
two (2)persons present in opposition.Staff briefly described
the proposed rezoning,with a recommendation of denial.StaffalsopresentedtheproposedLandUsePlanAmendment,with a
recommendation of denial.Staff noted that the applicant had
requested deferral of this item to the November 29,2001 agenda.
The Chairman removed this item from the Consent Agenda fordeferral,so that one (1)of the persons present in oppositioncouldaddresstheCommission.
Mary Dornhoffer addressed the Commission in opposition to the
proposed rezoning.She stated the following points as specificreasonsfortheopposition:
1.The rezoning would significantly impact the traffic flow inthearea.
2.There was a large amount of vacant commercial property in thearea.
3.The increase in commercial zoning would be detrimental to thesceniccorridor.
4.The rezoning would negatively impact the property values in
the area.
There was a motion to defer the application to the November 29,2001 agenda.The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,1 nay and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised application to staff on
October 29,2001.The revised application adds 30.76 acres of
property for rezoning to the original five (5)acre rezoningrequest.The revised application includes all of the undevelopedR-2 zoned property south of the existing C-3 zoning to Chenal
Parkway,for a total of 35.76 acres.
The applicant is now requesting to rezone a 10.92 acre strip
along the south line of the existing C-3 zoned property from R-2
4
Novea~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
to C-3.The applicant is also requesting to rezone 10.58 acres
to the south from R-2 to 0-2 (Office and Institutional District),
and 14.26 acres from R-2 to OS (Open Space District).There is a
250 foot wide AP&L easement which runs along the east boundary of
the overall acreage.Therefore,1.89 acres of the requested C-3
zoning and 6 acres of the requested OS zoning are located within
the utility easement.There is also a 100 foot wide utility
easement which runs north/south through the center of this
overall property.This easement will serve as additional buffer
area along the east side of the proposed 0-2 zoning.
Staff is supportive of the revised application.Staff was not in
favor of the rezoning of five (5)acres of the property to C-3,
moving the C-3 zoning line further south adjacent to undeveloped
R-2 zoned property.This was due primarily to the fact thatstaffhadconcernsaboutthetransitionfromtheC-3 zoned
property to the single family neighborhoods to the southeast and
southwest (across Chenal Parkway).Staff feels that the
applicant has addressed the transition issue with the revised
application,proposing 10.58 acres of 0-2 zoning and 14.26 acresofOSzoningsouthoftheproposedC-3.
The proposed 14.26 acres of OS zoning will provide a very nicebufferfortheAberdeenCourtNeighborhoodfromtheproposed0-2
and C-3 zones.The proposed OS area will allow for the existinghilltopandforestedareatobepreserved.The highest point of
the hill is located between 70 and 90 feet above the existing
grades along the east property line of the proposed OS area.
In addition,the proposed 10.58 acres of 0-2 zoning will allow
adequate transition from the C-3 zoned property to Chenal
Parkway,for the single family lots located to the southwest,incloseproximitytotheParkway.It should be noted that the 0-2
zoning district is a site plan review district,and has greater
minimum setback requirements and a larger required lot size than
do the other office districts.Therefore,the Planning
Commission will have control over the development of thistransitionarea.Following are excerpts from the City of Little
Rock Zoning Ordinance which address the purpose and intent of the0-2 zoning district:
"To provide appropriate locations for well-designedofficefacilitiesonlargetracts,generally not
available in the built-up areas of the city,and to
provide for unified orderly development of majorcultural,educational,medical,governmental andreligiousfacilities."
5
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
"In order to support and enhance their benefit to
the community,height and area,standards are
designed to assure the harmonious integration of
such development with surrounding neighborhoods."
"The 0-2 district may be applied to either existing
developed areas to facilitate expansion of existingofficeandinstitutionalusesortoundeveloped
locations where such uses are also appropriate."
"Low intensity of land usage and a park-like setting
are primary characteristics of this district.Whereofficebuildingshigherthanforty-five (45)feet
are anticipated,greater setbacks are required in
order to provide light and air to adjacentproperties."
Staff believes that the C-3,0-2 and OS rezoning requests are
compatible with uses and zoning in the area,and will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties.Staff is willing to
forgo the issue related to the amount of available,undeveloped
commercial zoned property in this general area,based on the factthattheapplicanthasproposedanoverallzoningplanforthisentire35.76 acre property,which includes all of the undeveloped
property between the C-3 zoned property along Cantrell Road and
Chenal Parkway.The applicant also revised the Land Use Plan
Amendment application (Item A on this agenda)to include this
property.Staff also supports the revised Land Use Plan
Amendment,as the proposed rezonings conform to the proposed
amendments.
Revised Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the C-3,0-2 and OS zoning requests,as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
Tim Daters and Jack McCray were present,representing the
application.There was one (1)person present in opposition.
Staff explained the revised rezoning application with a
recommendation of approval.This application was discussed
simultaneously with Item A (LU01-19-06).
6
Novesuer 29,2001
1TEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
Tim Daters addressed the Commission in support of the
application.
Tom Draper,president of the Duquesne Place Property Owner's
Association,addressed the Commission in opposition.Mr.Draper
expressed concern with traffic in this general area.He noted
that egress and ingress was difficult to his subdivision.He
noted that Deltic Timber Corporation was in the process of
platting a large number of single family lots west of the
Duquesne Subdivision,which would compound the traffic problem.
He mentioned the traffic count along this section of Chenal
Parkway.He also noted that the rezonings would generate
additional traffic in this area.He stated that the proposed
rezonings would have an adverse impact on the single family
property values in this area.
Commissioner Berry asked if the Duquesne Subdivision had only one
(1)way in and out.Staff noted that Northfield Road/Chalamont
Drive had been constructed and extended to Cantrell Road,giving
the subdivision two (2)points of access.Mr.Daters also noted
that there was an emergency access platted to the Duquesne
Subdivision.
Commissioner Rector asked when the additional improvements to
this area of Chenal Parkway would be made and who would be
responsible for the improvements.Bob Turner,Director of Public
Works,noted that when the traffic count got to 12,000 vehicles
per day,the required additional improvements to Chenal Parkway
would have to be made.He noted that Deltic Timber Corporation
would be responsible for the improvements.
Commissioner Floyd asked about access to the new single family
subdivision west of the Duquesne Subdivision.Mr.Daters noted
that Chalamont Drive was a collector street which extended from
Chenal Parkway to Cantrell Road,giving the subdivision two (2)
points of access.This issue was briefly discussed.
Commissioner Floyd asked if the property owners had a user or
buyer for the property.Jack McCray,of Deltic Timber
Corporation,noted that there was no planned use for the propertyatthistime.
There was a motion to approve the Land Use Plan Amendment LU01-
19-06.The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,3 nays and
1 absent.The application was approved.
7
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7096
Mr.Draper made additional comments regarding traffic in the area
of the Duquesne Subdivision and access to this subdivision.
There was a second motion to approve the C-3,0-2 and OS
rezonings,as filed.The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,
3 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
8
Nov~mer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-7093
NAME:Holy Temple Church of God in Christ-Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:1315 S.Pulaski Street
DEVELOPER:SURVEYOR:
Holy Temple Church of God in Christ Ollen Dee Wilson
1322 S.Pulaski Street P.O.Box 604
Little Rock,AR North Little Rock,AR
72115-0604 "
AREA:0.16 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-4 ALLOWED USES:Single family and two-family
residential
PROPOSED USE:Church parking lot
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None re&@rested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant,Holy Temple Church of God in Christ,is
requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the
construction of a church parking lot on the R-4 zoned
property at 1315 S.Pulaski Street.The proposed parking
lot will be located directly across South Pulaski Street
from the Church.
The proposed parking lot will contain 12 angle (60 degree)
parking spaces with one-way access from S.Pulaski Street.
The alley along the property's east property line will be
improved and utilized as an exit point.
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO,:Z-7093
The parking lot will have seven (7)foot landscape buffezs
along the north and south property lines.Landscape
screening will be utilized along these property lines,in-
lieu of wood screening fences.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The lot is currently vacant and grass-covered.There are
single family residences immediately nozth and south of thesite,with a mixture of uses further south along Daisy
Gatson Bates Drive.The Holy Temple Church is located to
the west across South Pulaski Street.There is an
undeveloped,grass-covered alley along the property's east
boundary,with single family residences aczoss the alley"
along Cross Street.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.All property owners within 200 feet of thesite,all residents within 300 feet of the site who could beidentified,and the Central High,Downtown,Wright Avenue
and East of Broadway Neighborhood Associations were notifiedofthepublichearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18/031.
2.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
3.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Repair alley for sufficient access.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
2
Novemcer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7093
Water:No Comment.
Fire Department:No Comment.
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.Landsca e Issues:
The proposed northern and southern perimeter land use
buffers fall short of the minimum 6.7 foot width allowed
within the designated "mature area".The street buffer
minimum width allowed is also 6.7 feet.Additionally,the
Landscape Ordinance perimeter landscape strip minimum width
allowed is 6.7 feet.The full width requirement without the
"mature area"designation by both the Zoning Ordinance and
the Landscape Ordinance in each case is 9-feet.
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.
A minimum of 6%(312 square feet)of the interior of the
vehicular use area must be landscaped.The full requirement
without the "mature area"designation is 8%(416 squarefeet).
A water source within 75 feet of all landscaped areas is
required.
G SUED IVI S ION COMMI TTEE COMMENT (SEPTEMBER 2 7 ~2 0 0 1 )
The applicant was not present.Staff briefly described the
proposed conditional use permit.Staff noted that the site
plan (parking lot)needed to be redesigned so that the
appropriate landscape buffers along the north and south
property lines and interior landscaping are provided.
Staff noted that the applicant would be contacted concerning
the changes which needed to be made.There being no further
3
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7093
issues for discussion,the Committee forwarded the
conditional use permit to the full Commission for final
action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
October 3,2001.The revised site plan satisfies the issues
as raised by staff at the Subdivision Committee meeting.
The proposed parking lot has been redesigned using 60 degree
angle parking,with a total of 12 parking spaces.The
landscape buffers along the north and south property lines
have been increased to seven (7)feet in width,thereby
satisfying the landscape/buffer requirements.Interior
landscaping has also been provided.The applicant also
notes that landscape screening will be provided along the
north and south property lines.
To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed conditional use permit.The
use of this lot for a church parking lot should have no
adverse impact on the surrounding properties,with the
appropriate buffers and landscaping provided.
I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D
and F of this report.
2.The alley along the east property line must be improved
to provide appropriate access.The applicant must work
with Public Works regarding this issue.
3.Any site lighting must be low-leveled and directed away
from adjacent residential property.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 182001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletterrequestingthattheapplicationbedeferredtothe
November 29,2001 agenda.Staff supported the deferral as
requested.
4
Novemner 29,2001
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7093
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the November 29,2001
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion.
The,item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 10 eyes,0 noes and 1 absent.
5
Ni ~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D 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 &McGetrick
P.O.Box 56403 319 E.Markham Street
Little Rock,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 550
foot cul-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 of
trees,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 proximity to
the site.The area around the site is developed as
single-family residence.Other uses in the area
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (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 detention
facilities are required.
6.Analyze downstream stormwater 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 required for the project.
Contact Jim Boyd at 376-2903 for details.
N~t:No o t *d.
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 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (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 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (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 with
this application.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 152001)
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.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
Mr.Pat McGetrick,of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was
present representing the applicant.There were two citizens
with concerns present.
Staff presented the proposed preliminary plat and
recommended approval subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above.
4
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
Mr.Pat McGetrick stated he was the project engineer.He
stated the application as proposed met all the minimum
requirements of the subdivision ordinance.He also stated
he and the applicant had met with the neighborhood
association in the area and would work to meet their
concerns,which had been outlined.One concern,stated Mr.
McGetrick,was drainage.He stated this would be addressed
as required by the stormwater detention ordinance.The
second concern,the alignment of Freeland Drive and the
entrance to the proposed subdivision,stated Mr.McGetrick,
would be worked out with Public Works.He stated moving the
entrance to the proposed subdivision would required an
adjustment to a few of the lots to make the alignment.
Ms.Betty Snyder spoke to the Commission with concerns.She
stated her home was directly across the street from the
proposed subdivision.She stated the Geyer Springs
Neighborhood Association was not opposed to a new housing
development.The number of new homes was a concern but once
the neighborhood was told the subdivision met the
requirements of the ordinance this was no longer an issue
stated Ms.Snyder.She stated the access was also a
concern.Freeland Drive has a wide entryway stated Ms.
Snyder.She stated West 57 Street did not have curb and
gutter and she commented on the narrowness of the roadway.
She stated it was difficult to turn from Freeland Drive onto
West 57 "Street because of the narrow roadway.She stated
the applicant had indicated they would build nine homes to
start and then see how those sold.If the homes did not
sell,the applicant had indicated she would convert to
Section 8 Housing.Ms.Snyder stated the Association had
given the applicant a list of agencies to contact to obtain
a listing of qualified buyers.Ms.Snyder also stated the
applicant had indicated the desire was to make the homes
comparable to some of the homes in the area.Ms Snyder
stated,in her opinion,this would be a positive thing for
the neighborhood.
Ms.Snyder reiterated her concerns of traffic on West 57
Street,flooding on the north end of the proposed
development,concern of the entryway alignment and the
possibility of an entire Section 8 Housing development.
Ms.Snyder stated the neighborhood was not against
5
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
affordable housing.A mixture of Section 8 Housing and
conventional financed homes would be acceptable.
Ms.Janet Berry,President of the Southwest Little Rock
United for Progress,spoke in support of the Geyer Springs
Neighborhood Association'concerns.She stated Mr.
McGetrick had offered several possible solutions for a
majority of the neighborhood concerns and these solutions
should be incorporated into the record if all parties agreed
to these solutions.
Commissioner Rector asked Mr.McGetrick if he understood
what he was committing to.
Mr.McGetrick stated the commitment was to line-up Freeland
Drive and access to the subdivision.He stated he would
align the intersections as close as possible.He stated the
applicant would widen West 57 Street as a part of the
development as required by city ordinance.Mr.McGetrick
also stated the project would not make the drainage worse in
the area.He stated the project would have on-site
detention or,in working with Public Works,the applicant
would improve downstream drainage in lieu of detention on
the site.
Commissioner Rector stated by law,the project could not
exacerbate the drainage problem in the area.
Mr.McGetrick stated his desire was to make the drainage
better and the project would not make the drainage problem
any worse in the area.
Commissioner Rector stated the Section 8 Housing was not a
land use issue and could not be addressed as a part of the
subdivision requirements.
Mr.Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,
requested the Commission allow Mr.Bob Turner,Director of
Public Works,to address the street alignment issue.Mr.
Lawson stated Mr.McGetrick had indicated he would try to
line-up Freeland Drive and the entrance to the proposed
subdivision but "try"was not something staff could work
with.
6
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
Mr.Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,stated the streets
were off-set approximately 75 feet and he did not feel the
streets could line-up without the loss of three lots.He
indicated the street could be relocated approximately 45 to
50 feet without eliminating any lots.Mr.Turner stated to
move the street any further would result in the loss of
three lots and he was not sure the applicant would be
agreeable to losing those lots.With the movement of the
street 45 to 50 feet there would still be buildable lots and
the streets would be close to lined up,within 10 to 15
feet.
Commissioner Rector asked if there were traffic counts for
West 57 Street.
Mr.Turner stated he was unaware of any traffic counts for
West 57 Street.
Commissioner Floyd asked Mr.McGetrick how the street
realignment would not result in the loss of lots.
Mr.McGetrick stated if the proposed street was within 15 to
20 feet of the intersection of Freeland Drive and West 57
Street and with the current angle of the intersection of
Freeland Drive,the streets would appear to be aligned.
Commissioner Floyd the asked about the drainage issue.
Mr.McGetrick stated as a part of the development the
applicant would be required,by city ordinance,to examine
possible drainage solutions.One solution,stated Mr.
McGetrick,would be to place detention on the site.He
stated another solution would be to look at downstream pipe
sizes.In doing so an exchange of increasing pipe sizes
downstream could help to relieve drainage and be a better
solution than on site detention.He stated there were
several ways to work out the drainage issues and he would
work with the city and with the neighborhood for the best
solution to improve the drainage on the site.He stated he
did not know what the best solution would be without further
study.
7
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1326
Commissioner Lowery asked Mr.McGetrick if the movement of
the street 45 to 50 feet was an amendment to his
application.
Mr.McGetrick stated the movement of the street was in fact
an amendment to his application.
Commissioner Lowery made the motion to approve the
preliminary plat as filed including all staff
recommendations and comments and the amendment by the
applicant.
The vote passed 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
8
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:S-1327
NAME:Healthy Lawns and Shrubs Inc.—Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION:On the West side of Westpark Drive,approximately 450
feet South of West 12 Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Healthy Lawns and Shrubs McGetrick 4 McGetrick
P.O.Box 56499 319 E.Markham Street
Little Rock,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 requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The property is zoned I-2 and contain an existing structures
used by Healthy Lawns and Shrubs.Healthy Lawns and ShrubsisanexistinglawncarecenterlocatedonWest12Street,
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 by
the Planning Commission.
The applicant proposes the construction of a 500 square foot
building near the east property line within an existing
concrete/asphalt area.The applicant notes that the
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1327
exterior of the new storage building will match the 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 fenceisasix-foot wooden fence.To the south and west the fenceisasix-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.Stozmwater 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
Novemrter 29,2001
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1327
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
~Et 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:Appzoved as submitted.
Count Plannin No comment received.
CATA:Project site is located near Bus Route ¹3 and has noeffectonbusradius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No comment,
Cit Reco nired 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 perimetez of thesite.
3
Novemcer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:8-1327
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.Any
additional lighting will be on the building.The applicant
has indicated a fence or landscape barrier will be
constructed on the south side of the property.
4
Novemner 29,2001
ITEM NO.:E (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.
1 .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 of the item to
the November 29,2001 public hearing.The applicant failed to
notify abutting property owners within the required time period.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 2 9 ~2 00 1 )
Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant.There were
no objectors present.
Staff recommended approval of the Subdivision Site Plan subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendations"above.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
5
Nove'29,2001
ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:Z-3252-A
Owner:Ole Tyme,Inc.
Applicant:Howard Drucker,President of
Ole Tyme,Inc.
Location:7200 Geyer Springs Road
Request:Rezone from 0-3 to 0-1
Purpose:To legitimize the existing nonconforming
single family residential use of the
property.
Size:0.18 acre
Existing Use:Single Family Residential and Office
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Single Family Residence;zoned 0-3
South —Commercial Strip Center;zoned C-3
East —Various commercial uses across Geyer Springs Road;
zoned C-3
West —Single Family Residence;zoned R-2
A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Geyer Springs 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.Myerson Drive is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30feetfromcenterline.
3.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is requiredatthecornerofGeyerSpringsRoadandunnamedstreet.
B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on a CATA Bus Route.
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3252-A
C.PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and
the Wakefield,Cloverdale,Geyer Springs and SWLR UP
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning
request.
D.LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Geyer Springs West Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this
property.The proposed zoning change for this property is
from 0-3 General Office District to 0-1 Quiet Office
District.A land use plan amendment for this action is not
necessary.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the
Chicot West I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan.It
contains a goal of improving community image.The action
statement under the community image goal relevant to this
zoning application is the encouragement of businesses to
landscape street corners and street frontage.
E.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request before the Commission is to rezone the 0.18 acre
property at 7200 Geyer Springs Road from "0-3"General
Office District to "0-1"Quiet Office District.The
property is located at the southwest corner of Geyer Springs
Road and Myerson Dr.,and is currently occupied by a single
family residential structure.The property owner,Howard
Drucker,maintains a residence in the structure,as well as
a small office use.The residential use of the property is
nonconforming,based on the fact that single family
residences are not permitted uses in 0-3 zoning.
The property owner recently requested to make a carport
addition to the existing structure.Based on the fact that
the use of the property is nonconforming,expansion of the
nonconforming use by way of a building addition is not
allowed by ordinance.Therefore,the property owner
requests to rezone the property from 0-3 to 0-1 in order to
2
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3252-A
legitimize the current use of the property.Both single
family residences and general/professional offices are
allowed in the 0-1 zoning district.
The Geyer Springs West District Land Use Plan recommends
Suburban Office for the site.The "0-1"Quiet Office
District rezoning request conforms to the adopted plan.
Staff is supportive of the rezoning request.The proposed0-1 zoning should prove to be better fit within this small
area of Suburban Office than the existing 0-3 zoning.The
inherent qualities of the 0-1 zoning district (height/area
regulations,permitted uses,etc.)will be more compatible
with the existing single family residential properties
immediately west of the site and across Myerson Drive to the
northwest.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested 0-1 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed this item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of
10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
3
No ~sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:Z-7111
Name:McGinister Day Care Family Home—
Special Use Permit
Location:3400 Walker Street
A~1':Gt'yMG''t
~Po l:A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a
day care family home to be operated in the
single family residence located on the R-3
zoned property at 3400 Walker Street.
Public Notification:
Neighbors within 200 feet of the site,residents within 300feetofthesiteandtheJohnBarrow,Campus Place and Twin
Lakes Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
Staff Anal sis:
The occupant of the single family home located on the R-3
zoned property at 3400 Walker Street is requesting approval
of a Special Use Permit to allow her to operate a day care
family home.
3400 Walker Street is located at the southwest corner of
West 34 "and Walker Streets.All surrounding properties
are zoned R-3 and are occupied by single family residences.
The applicant's home is a one-story,frame structure and is
typical of those in the general area.There is a single car
gravel driveway from West 34 Street,with parking for atleasttwo(2)vehicles.The side yard (south side)is
enclosed by chain link fencing and should provide a safe
play area.The applicant proposes to operate the day care
from 6:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday,with
occasional after hours care to 12:00 a.m.for parents who
may have to work late.The applicant notes that there may
be an occasional circumstance where weekend care will be
needed by a parent.
1
Nc ~sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7111
The principal use of the property will remain single family
residential.No signage beyond that allowed in single
family zones will be permitted.The applicant has noted
that she is licensed by the State Department of Human
Services for a day care family home for six (6)to ten (10)
children.
Section 36-54(e)(3)of the City of Little Rock Zoning
Ordinance establishes the site and location criteria for day
care family homes as follows:
a.This use may be located only in a single-family home,
occupied by the care giver.
b.Must be operated within licensing procedures
established by the State of Arkansas.State
regulations shall control the number of employees
residing off premises.
c.The use is limited to ten (10)children including the
care givers.
d.The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six
(6)children from households other than the care
givers.
e.This use must obtain a special use permit in all
districts where day care centers are not allowed by
right.
Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner.
Permits cannot be transferred from owner to owner,location
to location or use to use.
To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues
associated with this application.Staff feels that the
proposed day care family home at this location will have no
adverse impact on the general area.
2
No ~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7111
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow
a day care family home at 3400 Walker Street,subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the site and location criteria
established in Section 36-54(e)(3).
2.There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in
single family zones.
3.Outdoor activities,including playground use,are to
be limited to day-light hours.
PLANNINQ COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed this item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as
recommended by staff.A motion to that effect was made.
The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
3
x4~4 z-
Special Use Permit For Z.—7//(
Ms.Shirley McGinister (FDH)
870-227-6436
From all lands lying within 200 feet of the boundary of property at;
Address:3400 Walker Street
Owned by:Ms.Shirie McGinister
Notice is hereby given that we,the community,fully support the above applicant Ms.
McGinister in opening up a much-needed Family Daycare Home.
We,the community need a place safe for our children to go before and after school and
childcare that offers a structured classroom curriculum along with a home environment that
fosters nurtunng and allows our children to feel safe,accepted and ready to learn.
The signing of this petition advises that we,the community thank you for allowing Ms.
McGinister to furnish our children with a much needed Family Daycare Center,
Owners Name Address Date /Time
1Q t Q Ql
~3 -O —dr Zo~
3 O-I 7-ty
r'({3/
I -CI
di .Vo
/cPA Qotr cw !0-r -ol
&0
'lt-.
'I
~L~a
ll -l —'
10 1&
(Cr
'I-f7-0
Applicant:
Name
RECEIVED Date
OCT 24 7001
Nova.er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:2-5237-A
NAME:Watson Elementary School Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:7000 Valley Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT:Little Rock School District/Herron-Horton
Architects
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to
allow a classroom addition onto this
existing elementary school.The property is
zoned R-2.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the north side of Valley Drive;
two blocks east of Chicot Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY W1TH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The elementary school has existed as part of this
residential neighborhood for many years.The proposed
small classroom addition will not affect the continued
compatibility of the school with the neighborhood.At its
closest point,the addition is over 120 feet from the
nearest property line.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the siteallresidentswithin300feetwhocouldbeidentifiedand
the Chicot,Allendale,Santa Monica and SWLRUP Neighborhood
Associations were notified of this request.As of this
writing,staff has received no comments.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site has a large parking lot west of the building,
taking access off of Twin Oaks Drive.The parking lot was
designed with 120 spaces,although only 60 are currently
used.The remainder are in an area used as playground.
With the addition,the school will have 29 classrooms,
requiring 29 parking spaces.No changes are proposed for
the driveways or parking lots.A separate bus pick-
Noven er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5237-A
up/drop-off area is located in front of the school.This
one way drive takes access off of Valley Drive.
On site parking and bus areas are sufficient.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Since the proposed expansion is less than 10%of the
existing structures and no new vehicular use areas are
proposed,no upgzade in landscaping is required.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Valley Drive and Warren Road are classified on the
Master Street Plan as commercial streets.Dedicate
right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
2.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Valley Drive and Warren Road.
3.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
4.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that
is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.UTILITI,FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entezgy:No Comments received.
ARKLA:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments received.
Water:The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate
this site to determine whether additional fire hydrants
are required.lf additional water facilities aze
needed,they will be installed at the expense of the
developer.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No Comments received.
2
Novm.-er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5237-A
CATA:Project site is not located on a dedicated bus route
and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
Watson Elementary School is located on a 12+acre tract at
7000 Valley Drive.The main building contains 26
classrooms.A portable building located behind the school
contains two additional classrooms.The Little Rock SchoolDistrictproposestoconstructanadditionontotheeast
side of the school.The addition will contain two
classrooms,one of which can be divided by a partition
making a third classroom.The District will also be
remodeling the interior of the existing school.The
portable classroom building will continue to be used
throughout the remodeling,after which,it will be removed.
Plans are to have the entire project completed by the
beginning of the 2002-2003 school year.
No changes are proposed to the existing driveways and
parking areas.One monument style ground-mounted sign is
located in front of the school.No additional signage is
requested.The height of the existing school building is
12 feet.The pzoposed addition is to be 14'8"in height.
The height of the cafeteria is 18'5".The dumpster is
located north of the playground,west of the school.It
will be enclosed by the required 8'all,wood privacy
fence.New interior walkways and ADA ramps will be
installed on the site.
Staff is supportive of the request and believes allowing
the requested C.U.P.will not negatively impact the
neighborhood.
The applicant submitted a revised site plan on November 14,
2001 answering issues raised at the Subdivision Committee.
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the comments in Sections 5 and 6 of this
report.
3
Novw..sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-5237-A
2.The portable classroom building is to be removed from
the property when renovations to the existing building
are complete.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(NOVEMBER 8,2001)
Jennifer Herron was present representing the application.Staff
presented the item and noted that additional information was
needed regarding the number of classrooms existing and proposed,
the number of parking spaces on site,building height,signage,
fencing and bus circulation on the site.The applicant was
asked to indicate required screening around the dumpster and to
provide a phasing plan for removal of the portable classroom
building.Public Works Comments were presented.The applicant
was advised to meet with staff regarding the issue of right-of-
way dedication.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and
forwarded the item to the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion.AletterofsupporthadbeensubmittedbyJanetBerry,president
of SWLRUP.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes and 1
absent.
4
Noven er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:Z-5460-A
NAME:Brady Elementary School Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:7915 West Markham Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Little Rock School District/McGetrick
and McGetrick
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to
allow a classroom addition onto this
existing elementary school.The property is
zoned R-2.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of West Markham
Street;one block east of its intersection with Rodney
Parham Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The elementary school has existed as part of this
neighborhood for many years.The proposed classroom
addition will not affect the continued compatibility of the
school with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,
all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and
the Apache Crimewatch Neighborhood Association were
notified of this request.As of this writing,staff has
received no comments.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site has a 27 space parking lot located west of the
building and a 44 space parking lot located on the east
side.The bus drop-off is located directly in front of the
school.All driveways are one-way,entrance and exit.No
changes are proposed in the driveway/parking layout,
November 29,2001
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5460-A
Once the expansion is completed,the school will have
29 classrooms,requiring 29 parking spaces.The 71 spaces
existing on the site are sufficient to meet ordinance
requirements.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
The proposed 12%building expansion will require a 12%
upgrade in landscaping toward compliance with the Landscape
Ordinance.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.West Markham is classified on the Master Street Plan as
a minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 35
feet from centerline will be required.
2.Rodney Parham 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.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.(Existing driveways may remain.)
4.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
5.Repair or replace any curb gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
6.plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
7.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
8.Easements for proposed stormwa'ter detention facilities
are required.
9.Grading permit will be required on this development.
6.UTILITY,FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
ARKLA:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate
this site to determine whether additional fire hydrants
are required.If additional water facilities are
2
Nov~~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5460-A
needed,they will be installed at the expense of the
developer.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
Count Plannin :No Comments received.
CATA:project site is located on bus route ¹5 and has no
effect on bus radius,turnout and route.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
Brady Elementary School is located on an R-2 zoned,6+acre
tract at 7915 West Markham Street.The site currently
contains the main school building,two portable classroom
buildings and parking lots with 71 spaces.The Little Rock
School District proposes the construction of an addition
onto the rear of the school and removal of the two portable
classrooms.The portable classroom on the south side of
the site will be relocated to allow construction of the
classroom addition.Once the addition is complete,both
portables will be removed.No changes will be made to the
parking lot and driveways.The site has four driveways
onto West Markham.They will be allowed to remain since
they are one-way,entrance and exit and serve two separated
parking lots and the bus drop-off/pick-up.The addition
will be one-story (10'8")in height.Once the addition is
complete,the school will have 29 classrooms.Signage will
remain as it currently exists;one ground-mounted sign,a
roof sign and a canopy sign,
Staff is supportive of the request.The school has been
part of this neighborhood for many years.Allowing the
addition will have no impact on adjacent properties.
Indeed,removal of the two portables will result in greater
setbacks from the property lines on the south and east.A
large part of the site,west of the school,is tree-covered
and will remain undeveloped.
The applicant submitted a site plan and revised cover
letter on November 14,2001 that addressed staff concerns
and issues raised at the Subdivision Committee meeting.
3
Nova sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-5460-A
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
subject to compliance with the comments outlined in
Sections 4,5 and 6 of this report.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(NOVEMBER 8,2 0 0 1 )
Pat McGetrick was present representing the application.Staff
presented the item and noted that additional information was
needed regarding the number of classrooms existing and proposed,
the number of parking spaces on site,building height,signage,
fencing and bus circulation on the site.The applicant was
asked to indicate required screening around the dumpster and to
provide a phasing plan for removal of the two portable classroom
buildings.Public Works Comments were presented.It was noted
that West Markham has a reduced right-of-way standard.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and
forwarded the item to the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
Nove ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:Z-6762-B
NAME:Lot 3,Hampton-Goff Subdivision Revised
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:1219 S.Shackleford Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:New Project LLC and Moses Family
Trust/Charles Gray,KDA
PROPOSAL:A revision to the previously approved
Conditional Use Permit is requested allow
development of a Credit Union branch on this0-2 zoned property.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the east side of S.Shackleford
Road;one block south of Kanis Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in an area of Mixed Office and
Commercial uses and zoning.Use of the property as a
Credit Union branch is certainly compatible with the
neighborhood.The only question is whether the specificsofthesiteplanregardingsignageanddrivewaylocations
are appropriate for the site.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and
the John Barrow and Sandpiper Neighborhood Associations
were notified of this request.As of this writing,staff
has received no comments.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site is accessed by a driveway off of the 50 foot
shared access easement that serves all three lots.The
applicant is requesting an exit only driveway onto
Shackleford Road.Thirty-seven on-site parking spaces are
proposed.Eighteen spaces are required for a facility this
Novw ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6762-B
size.Additionally,the facility will have four drive-thru
lanes with stacking space for four vehicles each and an ATM
lane with stacking space for three vehicles.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffezs and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be
required.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
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 thatisdamagedinthepublicright-of-way prior to
occupancy.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Eliminate driveway on Shacklefozd.
4.plans of all Work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.6.Grading permit will be required on this development.
6.UTILITI FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
ARKLA:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Customer must pay for any needed
relocations.
Water:An acreage charge of $150.00 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges.(1.57 acres 8 $150.00 per
acre —$235.50)
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants pez code.
Count Plannin :No Comments received.
2
Nova.,er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6762-B
CATA:Project site is located near bus route 44 and has noeffectonbusradius,turnout and route.
Plannin Division:No Comments.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
On November 11,1999,the Commission approved a conditional
use pezmit to allow a three-lot development on the 0-2
zoned property at 1219-1225 S.Shackleford Road.A hotel
was approved on the larger of the three lots and
restaurants were approved for each of the two smaller lots
that front onto Shackleford Road.The three-lot
development was tied together as a single conditional use,
with variances and conditions being attached to the overall
development.The hotel has subsequently been constructed
and is now in operation.The applicant proposes to
construct a credit union branch on one of the two remaining
smaller lots;Lot 3.A bank or credit union is a permitted
use in 0-2 and if the applicant had submitted a site planthatconformedtothedevelopmentplanapprovedbythe
Commission in 1999,staff would have dealt with the issueatstafflevel.There are two issues,however that
prompted staff to return the item to the Commission.
First,when the three-lot conditional use permit was
approved in 1999,a variance was gzanted allowing for a
single,20 foot tall,10 feet wide,monument style sign to
serve all three lots.The ordinance maximum for ground-
mounted signs in the office district is 6 feet in height
and 64 square feet in area.The 200 square foot monument
sign was approved subject to no additional ground-mounted
signs being placed on the site.Based on that variance,
the hotel received a sign permit for and erected a 20 foottall,105 square foot sign during the summer of this year.
Additional panel space is available for the two remaininglotstoplacetheirsigns.The applicant is asking to be
allowed to erect a separate,20 foot tall,125 square foot
ground-mounted sign on Lot 3 to serve only the credit
union.The applicant is requesting a wall sign on the
south wall,without direct street frontage.Staff is
supportive of that request.
Second,the previous,Planning Commission approved plan did
not have driveways directly onto S.Shackleford Road.All
three lots accessed the street via the 50 foot access
3
Nov~~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6762-B
easement which intersects S.Shackleford in line with
Shackleford West Blvd.The applicant is now requesting an
exit only driveway onto S.Shackleford Road,near the north
boundary of Lot 3.
Although staff is supportive of the proposed use of thesitebyacreditunionbranch,we cannot support either of
the two changes requested by the applicant.In good faith,
the Commission approved the 20 foot tall,200 square foot
ground sign in lieu of 3,6 foot tall,64 square foot
signs.The sign structure has been constructed.Allowing
a second ground-mounted sign that so greatly exceeds
ordinance maximums for office zoned properties is,instaff's opinion,inappropriate.
Due to sight-distance concerns and the heavy volume of
tzaffic on S.Shackleford Road,staff cannot support the
addition of another driveway as proposed by the applicant.
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application,as filed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(NOVEMBER 8,2001)
Kevin Webb,of KDA,was present representing the application.
Staff noted that additional information was needed on days and
hours of operation,site lighting,fencing,wall signage and
dumpster location.The issue regarding the proposed ground-
mounted sign was outlined by staff.Mr.Webb commented that
there would be no dumpster on the site,due to security
concerns.He stated a wall sign would be located on the west
wall,facing Shackleford and perhaps on the south wall.Staff
also requested the addition of a sound buffer wall on the east
side of the
drive-through lanes.
Public Works Comments were presented.Staff voiced opposition
to the proposed additional driveway onto Shackleford Road.
Staff stated it would be more acceptable to have an additional
one-way,exit only driveway onto the 50 foot easement rather
4
Nova..er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)PILE NO.:Z-6762-B
than an additional curb cut on Shackleford.Mr.Webb was
directed to meet with Public Works staff.
The Committee determined there,were no other issues and
forwarded the item to the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
Chairman Downing recused on this item.Vice Chair Rector
chaired the hearing.
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial.
Bob Turner,Directoz of Public Works,addressed the issue of the
proposed driveway onto Shackleford Road.He stated staff had
been talking with a potential developer of the property
immediately north of this site and had asked that developer to
push his driveway to the southern part of his lot;away from the
Kanis/Shackleford intersection.He stated he felt that request
was reasonable since this property would not have a driveway
onto Shackleford Road.Mr.Turner stated allowing this
applicant to have a driveway onto Shackleford would place a
driveway too close to the preferable driveway location for thelottothenorth.He stated staff would support allowing the
credit union to have a one-way,exit only driveway onto the 50-
foot access easement that serves the three lot,Hampton-Golf
Subdivision.
Vice Chair Rector asked if the applicant could have a shared
driveway with the lot to the north.Mr.Turner responded that
he did not think that would be feasible since the lot to the
north was going to potentially be developed as a bank and a bank
was not likely to agree to a shared driveway with a credit
union.
Vice Chair Rector noted the Commission was now down to eight
members present.He offered the applicant the opportunity to
defer the issue.The applicant stated he preferred to continue.
The applicant,Charles Gray,stated the proposed credit union
had different signage needs than the restaurant that was
originally proposed for the site.He stated the driveway was
needed for better traffic flow on the site.Mr.Gray stated the
5
Nova.ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6762-B
available space on the Hampton Inn sign was inadequate for the
credit union'needs.He described other uses and signs in the
area and stated he felt his requested sign was compatible with
development along this portion of Shackleford Road.
In response to a request from Vice Chair Rector,staff described
the location of the existing sign.
Jeff Hathaway,real estate agent for the buyer,described the
credit union as being a less intensive use than the previously
approved restaurant.He stated he felt it was a reasonable
trade-off;a reduction in intensity for a larger sign.He also
described the uses along this portion of Shackleford Road and
stated the proposed sign would not be out of character with
development in the area.Mr.Hathaway noted there was no
objection from area property owners.
In response to a question from Commissioner Floyd,Mr.Hathaway
stated he was not involved in the original C.U.P.request.
Commissioner Berry questioned why a less intensive use needed
more intensive signage.Mr.Gray responded that the signage
provided identity for the credit union that national brand
restaurants did not need.
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,stated the
proposed credit union,with its multiple drive-through lanes,
was a fairly intensive use.He reminded the Commission of the
efforts that had been taken to "de-commercialize"the 3-lot
development;including reducing overall signage.
Commissioner Floyd asked Mr.Gray if he would consider standard,
office district signage for the site.Mr.Gray responded that
he would prefer to have the sign approved,as requested.
Jimmy Moses addressed the Commission in support of the request.
He stated the was the applicant on the original C.U.P.Mr.
Moses stated the proposed use was less intensive than the
previously approved restaurant.
Wally Allen,owner of the Hampton Inn and part owner in the
group that owns the two out-lots,stated the hotel was approved
with no restaurant.He stated the restaurant sites were
approved as a package with the hotel and,as such,one shared
sign seemed reasonable.Mr.Allen stated the hotel had erected
less signage than was approved under the C.U.P.
6
Nova.ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6762-B
Vice Chair Rector asked Mr.Allen if he was saying the existing
sign would not be expanded.Mr.Allen responded that he could
not say that since there was an additional out-lot left to be
developed.Commissioner Floyd asked if the Commission could
expect to be looking at a request for a third sign.
Ruth Bell,of the League of Women Voters,voiced concerns about
the impact of changing previously approved plans and of the
proliferation of signs.She stated she felt using the available
space on the existing sign,combined with wall signage,should
be sufficient for the credit union.Ms.Bell stated the League
could support allowing the credit union to have office standard
signage.
Vice Chair Rector asked the applicant if it would be possible to
do a shared driveway with the lot to the north.The applicant
responded that a shared driveway was not possible but moving the
secondary driveway to the 50'ommon access drive was.
In response to a question from Vice Chair Rector,the applicant
stated he was amending his application to include moving the
secondary,one-way,exit only drive to the 50-foot shared access
easement.
Commissioner Lowry asked the applicant if he had re-thought the
issue of signage.Mr.Gray responded that his client wanted him
to pursue the issue.He asked for 2-3 minutes so that he could
call his client to confirm the client'wishes.
The Commission then took a short break.
After the break,Mr.Gray stated his client wanted to move
forward on the request.
Dana Carney,of the Planning Staff,reminded the Commission that
this was not an "either or"issue;that the applicant would not
have the option of erecting office standard signage,if the
request was denied since the existing C.U.P.did not allow
additional ground-mounted signage at all.
During the ensuing discussion,it was determined that the
Commission would vote on each issue separately.
7
Nova.ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6762-B
A motion was made to approve an amendment to the C.U.P.to allow
the one-way,exit only driveway onto the 50-foot shared access
easement.The motion was approved by a vote of 7 ayes,1 noe,
2 absent and 1 recusing (Downing).
A motion was made to approve an amendment to the C.U.P.to allow
the ground-mounted sign as requested.The motion failed with a
vote of 0 ayes,8 noes,2 absent and 1 recusing (Downing).
The applicant was instructed to use the existing sign or to
appeal to the Board of Directors.
8
Nova.er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:Z-7004-A
NAME:Kanis Plaza Muffler Shop Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:10901 Kanis Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Estate of Billy Bridewell/White-Daters
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to
allow an automobile muffler shop on this
C-3 zoned tract.
STAFF REPORT:
On November 14,2001,the applicant submitted a letter
requesting that the item be withdrawn.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request to withdraw
the item.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.
Staff informed the Commission of the applicant's request to
withdraw the item.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn by a
vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
Nova ier 29,2001
ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:E-7097
NAME:Penick Boys Club Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:1201 Leisure Place
OWNER/APPLICANT:Little Rock Boys and Girls Club,Inc./
Cromwell Architects
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested toallowforthephasedexpansionoftheexistingBoysClubandparkinglotlocated
on this R-5 zoned property.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the southeast corner of West12StreetandLeisurePlace;two blocks west ofUniversityAvenue.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The Boys Club is located within an area of severalrecreational-institutional uses.Allowing the proposedexpansionshouldnotaffecttheclub's continued
compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified andtheUniversityParkNeighborhoodAssociationwerenotifiedofthisrequest.As of this writing,staff has received nocomments.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site currently has a 45 space parking lot accessed by asingledrivewayoffofLeisurePlace.Phase I is theadditionofa29spaceparkinglotandarightturn/exitonlydrivewayontoLeisurePlace.Phase II is an additiontothePhaseIparkinglotandreconstructionoftheexistingparkinglot;resulting in a final total of 84on-site parking spaces.The ratio of parking spaces tobuildingareawillbeincreased.
Nove'r 29,2001
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7097
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be
required.
prior to a building permit issued,it will be necessary to
submit an approved Landscape Plan stamped with the seal of
a registered landscape architect.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
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 thatisdamagedinthepublicright-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.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance18,031.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
ARKLA:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Request 10 foot easement.north to south
along east property line (existing line).
Water:The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate
this site to determine whether additional fire hydrants
are required.If additional water facilities are
needed,they will be installed at the expense of the
developer.
Fire Department:Private fire hydrant may be required if
the building is not sprinkled.
2
Nov~~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7097
Count Plannin :No Comments received.
CATA:Project site is located bus route t3 but has noeffectonbusradius,turnout and route.
Plannin Division:No Comments.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The James Penick Boys Club is located on the R-5 zoned,4.3+acre tract at 1201 Leisure Place.The property is
occupied by an 18,400 square foot building,a 45 space
parking lot and a baseball field.The building consists of
a gym,game room,multipurpose room,snack bar,craft zoom,
library,studio,offices and zestrooms.The building is
utilized for programs such as Power Hour,SMART Moves,
SMART Kids,group activities,summer programs,life skills
training,Torch Clubs,TEENSupreme Keystone Club,Job
Ready!,computer education and prevention services.Summer
hours are Monday-Friday,8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.Winter
hours are Monday-Friday,3:00 p.m.to 8:00 p.m.and
Saturday,10:00 a.m.to 4:00 p.m.One 24'4'round-
mounted sign is located on the property's 12 Street
frontage.
The Boys Club is requesting a conditional use permit to
allow for a two-phased expansion of the facility and
parking lot.Phase I consists of a new,29 space parkinglotandaright-turn/exit only driveway onto Leisure Place.
Phase II consists of a 6,500 square foot addition onto the
west side of the building,reconstruction of the existing
parking lot and an addition to the Phase I parking lot.At
the end of Phase II,the site will contain a 24,900 square
foot,26'all building,an 84 space parking lot and a
baseball field.The property will continue to be utilized
for the same programs currently taking place.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use
pezmit.Allowing the expansion should not affect thesite'continued compatibility with the neighborhood.ThesiteisadjacenttoparkfacilitiesandaYWCA.A 36 foot
landscaped buffer will separate the new parking lots from
the single family homes located across West 12 Street.
3
Nove.er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7097
On November 14,2001,the applicant submitted a revised
site plan,addressing issues raised at the Subdivision
Committee meeting.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the comments in Sections
4,5 and 6 of this report.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(NOVEMBER 8,2001)
John Peterson was present representing the application.Staff
noted that additional information was needed regarding building
height,signage,fencing,dumpster location and screening,days
and hours of operation,site lighting and building square
footage.The applicant was also asked to provide greater detail
about the use of the property and the proposed building
expansion.
Public Works Comments were discussed and focused on the proposed
new driveway onto Leisure Place.Mr.Peterson stated the
driveway could be modified to be right-in/right-out only.He
was advised to meet with staff about the issue.
Staff encouraged Mr.Peterson to save as many trees as possible
in the area of the parking lot expansion.The Committee
determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to
the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
4
Nove..er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:Z-7110
NAME:Crystal Volunteer Fire Department
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:17325 Lawson Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Crystal Volunteer Fire Department
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to
allow construction of a fire station onthisR-2 zoned property.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located between Lawson and Minton Roads,
west of Sullivan Road.The property is outside of
the corporate city limits,just inside the City'extraterritorial jurisdiction.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
It is staff'opinion that uses such as this are inherently
compatible with neighborhoods,whether those neighborhoodsareresidentialornonresidentialinnature.In this case,the station is to be located in an area of mixed uses and
zoning,adding to its compatibility.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site
were notified of this request.The property is located
outside of the city and staff has no database to notifyresidentsaroundthesite.There is no neighborhood
association in the vicinity.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Two driveways are proposed to access the site from Lawson
Road;a 45'ide driveway for use by the emergency vehicles
and a 25'riveway for use by other vehicles.Paved
driveways and a concrete apron will be located in front of
the building.Two areas of gravel parking will be located
adjacent to and behind the building.These will besufficientforfirefighters'ersonal vehicles as well asforothervisitorstothesite.A third driveway will take
Nove.er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7110
access off of Minton Road.This driveway will be paved to
a depth of 50'o prevent gravel from the parking lot being
dragged onto the street.The driveway and parking
arrangement is sufficient foz the use.Staff supports useofthegravelparkinglotasshown.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence withitsfacesidedizectedoutwardordenseevergreen
plantings,is required east of the proposed construction.
Unless necessary for fire truck egress and ingress,it is
recommended that the 100 foot wide driveway be reduced in
width to preserve additional trees and greenspace.
It will be necessary to identify where the parking area
will be in order to determine landscaping and buffer
requirements.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as manyexistingtreesasfeasible.Extra czedit can be given
toward fulfilling landscape requirements when preservingtreesof6-inch caliper or larger.
The gravel parking areas are to be enclosed by railroadtiesorsomeotherdevicetopreventthegravelfrombeing
spread beyond the parking area.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Lawson Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline will be required.
2.Minton Road is classified on the Master Street plan as a
commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(MasterStreetPlan).Construct one-half street improvement to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
4.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance18,031.Request driveway with variance.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
2
Novm sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7110
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Outside service boundary,no comment.
Entergy:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Execution of a pre-annexation agreement and
approval of the City will be required prior to obtaining
water service.
Fire Department:Outside city,no comment.
Count Plannin :No Comments received.
CATA:Project site is not located on a dedicated bus route
and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route,
Plannin Division:No Comments.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
Crystal Fire Protection District ¹24 requests approval of a
conditional use permit to allow for construction of a fire
station on the vacant,R-2 zoned property located at 17325
Lawson Road.The property is some 3 miles outside of the
corporate city limits but is within the City's zoning
jurisdiction.The District proposes to build a single
story (30'all),120'80'uilding on the 4+acre tract.
Two driveways will access the site from Lawson Road;a 45
foot driveway for use by the emergency vehicles and a 25
foot driveway for use by other vehicles.A third driveway
will access the site from Minton Road.A gravel parkinglotwithspacefor30vehicleswillbelocatedadjacent to
and behind the building.The building will be used
principally as a fire station;however it will be made
available for community meetings and events.There will be
training inside the building as well as outside.Current
training schedule is two Saturdays in the daytime and two
Monday nights a month with a maximum of 30 volunteer
firemen in attendance.The training meetings last
approximately 3 hours.Security lighting will be placed on
3
Nove..~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-7110
and around the building.Ground mounted signs will be
placed on each street frontage.Each sign will not exceed6'n height and 64 square feet in area.No dumpster will
be located on the site.
Staff is supportive of the proposed fire station.The
property is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses.
The use should be compatible with development in this rural
neighborhood.
The applicants submitted a revised site plan and coverletteronNovember14,2001 that addressed issues raised at
the Subdivision Committee meeting.
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permitsubjecttocompliancewiththefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the comments outlined in Sections 4,
5 and 6 of this report.
2 .All site lighting is to be low-level and directional,
aimed inward and away from adjacent properties.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(NOVEMBER 8,2001)
Ray Carnahan and Danny Harris were present representing the
application.Staff noted that additional information was needed
regarding building height,signage,fencing,dumpster location
and screening and site lighting.Staff noted that parking areas
were not shown for any vehicles other than the fire equipment.
The applicants stated they would show additional parking and
asked that they be allowed to have gravel parking.Staff
responded that the driveway would need to be paved to asufficientlengthtopreventgravelbeingpulledontothestreet.Staff asked that the applicant provide a more detailed
cover letter indicating more fully what activities would take
place on the site;such as training and community meetings.
Public Works Comments were discussed.Staff questioned the needforthewidedrivewayfromLawsonRoad.The applicants
responded that they had 5 emergency vehicles and needed a wider
4
Nova..er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)PILE NO.:Z-7110
driveway to accommodate movement onto and off of the site by
those vehicles as well as civilian vehicles.It was suggested
that the width could be narrowed if a second driveway was
installed to accommodate the other vehicles.The applicants
stated they would discuss the issue with Public Works staff to
determine the best way to make the driveways work.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and
forwarded the item to the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation"above.Staff also recommended approval of a
variance to allow the area of gravel parking,as shown.There
was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
5
Nova er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:2-4423-E
NAME:Wal-Mart Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:700 S.Bowman Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Wal-Mart
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to
allow use of 30 temporary/seasonal storagetrailersforthestorageoflayawayand
Christmas merchandise each year from
October 1 through January 1 (90 days).
The property is zoned C-3.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The site is located at the southwest corner of Bowman Road
and Chenal Parkway.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The storage containers are kept behind the Wal-Mart Store,
in a "well"created by the store and the retaining
wall/buffer located across the rear of the site.The
containers are not visible from abutting properties.
Placement of the containers should have no effect on thestore'compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and
the Gibralter Heights and Bizchwood Neighborhood
Associations were notified of this request.As of this
writing,staff has received no comment.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
No changes aze proposed in the existing parking/drives.
The containers are located behind the building and some of
them are located on the service drive.Twenty feet of
driveway clearance is maintained.
Nove'..er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-4423-E
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet and exceed
ordinance requirements.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6.UTILITY,FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
ARKLA:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments received.
Water:The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate
this proposal.It appears that the containers may
hamper access to fire protection facilities.
Fire Department:Do not block any sprinkler FDC's or fire
hydrants.
CATA:project site is located on bus route ¹5 but has noeffectonbusradius,turnout and route.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
Wal-Mart operates a discount retail store located at
700 South Bowman Road in Little Rock,Arkansas.Wal-Mart
offers a layaway program for its customers,wherein
citizens of Little Rock can pay money down on their
Christmas purchases,and then pay off those purchases
over a ninety-(90)day period.Because of the demandforthisservice,Wal-Mart must utilize thirty-(30)
temporary/seasonal storage trailers for the excess layaway
and Christmas merchandise,each year.
Wal-Mart proposes to utilize no more than thirty-(30)
temporary/seasonal trailers behind its store,from
2
Novm.r 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4423-E
October through January 1 of each yeaz.After the
temporary/seasonal trailers are removed,the grass will
be re-seeded.
Staff believes the request is reasonable.The containers
are located in the service area behind the store.Due to
the presence of a retaining wall,privacy fence and a 50-
foot open space strip,the containers aze not visible from
adjacent properties behind the site.The applicant will
plant a dense landscape screen along the north perimeter of
the service area to further screen that area from Chenal
Parkway.The screening has been extended beyond the
containers to cover the entire north perimetez of the
service area.Some of the containers are on the service
drive adjacent to the back wall of the store.A 20-foot
driveway remains.The applicant must satisfy Fire
Department requirements that sprinkler FDC's and hydrants
are not blocked.The grassy area where some of the
containers are located will be reseeded each year after the
containers are removed.That area may be paved since it is
not part of any required landscape or buffer area.
On November 14,2001,the applicant submitted a revised
site plan showing the landscaping on the north perimeter of
the service area as requested by staff.
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following conditions:
1.The landscape screen along the north perimeter of the
service area must be installed as proposed.
2.Compliance with Fire Department Comments
3.The grassy area used for placement of some of the
storage containers must be resodded within 30 days of
removal of the containers each year and properly
maintained.If not,the area must be paved or the issue
will be brought back to the Commission for
reconsideration.
3
Nove.ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-4423-E
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(NOVEMBER 8,2001)
Charles Hanson and Scott Sanders were present representing the
application.Staff noted that a portion of the area used for
placement of the storage containers was a grassy area that could
be paved since it was not part of any required landscape or
buffer strip.Staff also asked that screening be placed along
the north perimeter of the service area to further screen the
storage containers from Chenal Parkway.The applicants
responded that they were unsure if Wal-Mart would pave the area
in question or reseed it with grass.They stated they would
provide screening along the north perimeter.
Fire Department Comments were noted.The applicants stated they
would work with the fire officials to assure that their concerns
are addressed.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and
forwarded the item to the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation"above.
Scott Sanders,store manager,identified himself and made
himself available to answer questions.
Commissioner Rector asked where the containers went the rest of
the year.Mr.Sanders responded that they were leased and
returned to the leasing company.
Commissioner Floyd noted that staff's write-up described the
containers as being located behind the store when,in fact,two
of the containers were located to the side of the store.
Ruth Bell,of the League of Women Voters,questioned whether the
containers would inhibit use of the service drive.She also
expressed concern about the two containers located to the side
of the store.Mr.Sanders responded that the containers did not
block the service drive and he could look at moving the two
containers from the side of the store.
4
Nove sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4423-E
Commissioner Berry commented that other retailers did not have
to use containers in this manner and Wal-Mart should do a better
job of planning for additional storage space.
Commissioner Muse asked what would happen if the other Wal-Marts
wanted to do something similar.Dana Carney,of the Planning
Staff,noted there was only one other Wal-Mart in Little Rock
and the Planning Commission had approved the use of storage
containers at that store in 1997.
Commissioner Rahman stated he agreed with Commissioner Berry
that Wal-Mart needed more store space,not temporary storage
containers.
Commissioner Rector commented that a store with more square
footage would require more parking under Little Rock's Zoning
Ordinance.He stated he felt this might be a better solution;
with the containers hidden by a retaining wall and a landscaped
buffer.
In response to a question from Commissioner Floyd,Jim Lawson,
Director of Planning and Development,stated the containers
would have to be located as shown on the approved plan.
Commissioner Faust commented that she had seen similar
containers at other store sites.Staff commented that those
containers were sometimes used to hold construction materials
and equipment during a remodeling project.
In response to qu'estions from Commissioner Allen,Mz.Sanders
stated he was not sure how many containers were used at the
Baseline Road Wal-Mart.Mr.Sanders stated the number of
containers was determined by projecting anticipated layaway and
storage needs at each store.
Commissioner Rahman commented that Wal-Mart needed to find
industrial warehouse space.
In response to a question from Commissioner Lowry,Mr.Sanders
stated the containers would be removed in the timeframe
requested and any unclaimed or unpaid layaway merchandise would
be returned to the store.
5
Nove ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4423-E
Commissioner Lowry asked if 30 containers was the maximum or
minimum number needed.Mr.Sanders responded that 30 was the
exact number needed foz this store.
Commissioner Lowry asked how Wal-Mart had handled the issue in
the past.Mr.Sanders responded that containers had been used
in previous years.He stated Wal-Mart was providing a service
to its customers by allowing layaways.
Chaizman Downing commented that he had no particular problem
with this specific request since the containers were hidden
between the back of the store and the retaining wall.He stated
his concern was one of setting a precedent;determining the
appropriate criteria for dealing with similar requests.He
asked why the issue was being reviewed as a conditional use.
Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles responded that the conditional
use review allowed the Commission to consider things that "just
don'really fit"into specific categories in the zoning
regulations;that it was an attempt to gain a public hearing on
the matter.
In response to a question from Chairman Downing,Tim Grooms,the
applicant'attorney,stated he felt use of the containers was a
permitted use in C-3.
Jim Lawson stated staff considered the issue to be one of open
display.He stated the storage containers were not buildings,
but were storage units being placed outside of the building.He
reiterated staff's goal of having some public review by bringing
the issue to the Commission.
Chairman Downing restated his concern about the process.
Tim Grooms stated allowing layaway of merchandise was a service
to the citizens of Little Rock.He noted that Wal-Mart had
notified 50 individuals of the request and had received only
four telephone calls;none of which expressed any concerns.
Commissioner Berry commented that the issue was one of planning
for storage.
Commissioner Floyd stated he was comfortable reviewing the
request as a conditional use since the use was similar to a
mini-warehouse.
6
Nova.sr 29,2001
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-4423-E
Commissioner Allen commended Wal-Mart for the service they
provide for citisens.
Commissioner Faust commented that this specific request had
minimal impact on the neighborhood but she would like to see the
larger issue put in an ordinance package for further review.
Chairman Downing stated his preference was to approve this
request for a specific time and then draft new ordinance
language to better address the issue.
A motion was made to approve the request,with staff
recommendations and conditions.The motion was seconded.
A motion was then made to amend the motion to allow the use of
the containers for this year only.The motion was seconded.
Staff questioned if it was reasonable to require the landscape
screen if the use was to be limited to this year.
A vote was taken on the motion to amend the original motion.
The vote was 7 ayes,3 noes and 1 absent.
A vote was then taken on the original motion,as amended.The
vote was 7 ayes,3 noes and 1 absent.
7
Nove.er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:10 FILE NO.:G-25-183-A
Name:Lee Avenue Name Change to Father Tribou Street
Location:Lee Avenue,west of University Avenue
Petitioner:City of Little Rock
~Rt:Rename Lee Avenue,west of University Avenue,
to Father Tribou Street
Abuttin Uses and Ownershi s:
A single use occupies the property on the north side of
Avenue;Catholic High School.The properties on the south side
of the street are occupied by a medical clinic,a nursing home,
one apartment building and two other office buildings.The
several properties have individual owners.
Nei hborhood Effect:
Catholic High School,several businesses and the tenants of the
apartment building will be required to change addresses.The
post office will honor the previous address for a year.
Nei hborhood Position:
All individuals and businesses abutting the street and the
Hillcrest Neighborhood Association will be notified of the
proposed name change.The association has not stated its
position.Several persons from the south side of Lee Avenue have
voiced opposition to the name change.
Effect on Public Services:
No opposition has been voiced by any public agency.Two street
name signs will need to be changed.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The City of Little Rock,in conjunction with Catholic High
School,has proposed to rename the portion of Lee Avenue located
Novemoer 29,2001
ITEM NO.:10 FILE NO.:G-25-183-A
west of University Avenue to Father Tribou Street in honor of the
longtime principal of Catholic High.This portion of Lee Avenue
is three blocks in length,extending from University Avenue to
McKinley Street.Catholic High School occupies the entirety of
the property on the north side of the street.Several offices,a
nursing home and one apartment building are located on the south
side of the street.The medical clinic on the east end of the
street takes an address on University Avenue and the large office
building on the west end takes its address on McKinley.The
school,nursing home,apartment building and two smaller office
buildings will be affected by the street name change.
This is an easily identifiable length of city street that has
long been associated with Catholic High.Staff believes it is
appropriate to change the street name to recognize the longtime
principal of the school,Father George Tribou.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed street name change.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
Vice-Mayor Brad Cazort was present on behalf of the application.
There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and a
recommendation of approval.Vice-Mayor Cazort thanked the
Commission for their attention to the issue and asked for a
positive vote.He stated it was appropriate to recognize Father
Tribou for his service to the City.There was no further
discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote
of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
2
Nova.ar 29,2001
ITEM NO.:11 F1LE NO.:G-25-184
Name:I-430/Colonel Glenn Commercial Subdivision;
Street Name Change
Location:Southwest corner of I-430 and Colonel Glenn Road
Petitioner:Vogel Enterprises/White-Daters and Associates
R~t:Rename three streets located within the boundary
of the I-430/Colonel Glenn Commercial Subdivision
Abuttin Uses and Ownershi s:
One lot,located directly at the SW corner of I-430 and Colonel
Glenn,is occupied by a new automobile dealership.All remaining
properties are undeveloped and owned by the applicant.
Nei hborhood Effect:
The automobile dealership has a Colonel Glenn Road address.
Since none of the other abutting properties are developed,there
will be no effect caused by the name change.
Nei hborhood Position:
The John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the automobile
dealership were notified of the name changes.No opinion has
been voiced by either.
Effect on Public Services:
No opposition has been voiced by public agencies.Only one of
the streets has been built and only one street name sign will
need to be changed.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The I-430/Colonel Glenn Commercial Subdivision is a multiple lot
commercial development proposed for the C-3 and C-4 zoned
property located at the SW corner of I-430 and Colonel Glenn
Road.At this point,only one lot has been developed,A new,
Novemner 29,2001
ITEM NO.:11 FILE NO.:G-25-184
automobile sales business is located on the lot directly at the
SW corner of 1-430 and Colonel Glenn.The proposed subdivision
is to include three new streets.Only a portion of one street,
abutting the automobile sales lot,has been constructed.Since
portions of the subdivision and streets have been final platted,it is necessary to go through the formal street name change
process.The applicant proposes to rename Commercial Center
Drive to Colonel Glenn Plaza Drive;Commercial Center Blvd.to
Colonel Glenn Court;and Health Care Blvd.to Bowman Plaza Drive.
The proposed street name changes will have no effect on the
neighborhood or abutting properties.No opposition has been
voiced by public service agencies.The sole developed property
has a Colonel Glenn Road address and will not be affected by the
change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed street name changes.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.A
letter of support had been sent by Janet Berry,president of
SWLRUP.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of
approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote
of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
2
November 29,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 FILE NO.:G-23-311
Name:Ferry Street between East 4'"
Street and East 3'treet in
Pope'Addition City ofLittleRock—Right-Of-Way
Abandonment.
Location:Approximately 300 feet ofStreetnorthofEast
4'treet.
Owner/A licant:Public Works-Bob Turner
R~t:To abandon the 60 feet wide
by 300 feet long street
right-of-way in Pope'
Addition,City of Little
Rock.
STAFF REVIEW:
1.Public Need for this street
Street is currently constructed as a public street
providing access to Post Office and Interstate I-30.
Frontage road is just next to it and will be able to
handle additional traffic.
2.Master Street Plan
Master Street Plan reflects no need for this section
of the street.
3.Need for Ri ht-of-Wa on Ad'scent Streets
There is sufficient right-of-way on East 3'treet and
East 4 Street.
4.Develo ment Potential
Applicant plans to incorporate street in the future
park and parking for the new Acxiom Building.
1
November 29,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 FILE NO.:G-23-3115.Nei hborhood Land Use and Effect
The general area is made up of a mixture of office and
commercial uses.
6.Nei hborhood Position
Axciom and AHTD are the only abutting property owners
in the subject area.
7.Effect on Public Services or Utilities
Entergy -has no objection to the abandonment.
ARKLA -has no objection to the abandonment.
Southwestern Bell -has no objection.
Water Works —has no objection.
Wastewater Utility —has no objection.
Fire Department —has no objection.
Neighborhood and Planning -has no objection to
abandonment.
8.Reversionar Ri hts
All Reversionary rights will extend to the property
owner.
9.Public Welfare and Safet issues
Abandoning this street will have no adverse effects on
the public welfare and safety.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of street abandonment,north of
East 4'treet,in Pope'Addition City of Little Rock
2
.mber 29,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 FILE NO.:G-23-311
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(November 8,2001)
The application was discussed briefly.Committee forwarded the item to the full
commission for final approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(November 29,2001)
Steve Giles,City of Little Rock City Attorney's Office,informed the Commission about
the implications of R-0-W closing next to Interstate and Federal Law requirements.
Commission recommended R-0-W closing or R-0-W franchise or other most appropriate
means of utilizing R-0-W for landscaping and parking.After a brief discussion,the
Commission determined it appropriate to place this item on the Consent Agenda for
approval.A motion to this effect was made.The motion to approve Consent Agenda
passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays,and I absent.
November 29,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:G-23-312
Name:Jonesboro Street between
Monroe Street and Zoo Drive
in War Memorial Park City ofLittleRockRight-Of-Way
Abandonment.
Location:Approximately 450 feet of
Jonesboro Drive south of ZooDrive.
Owner/A licant:Parks Department
~Rt:To abandon the 140 feet wide
by 450 feet long street
right-of-way in War Memorial
Park,City of Little Rock.
STAFF REVIEW:
1.Public Need for this street
Street is currently constructed as a public street
connecting Zoo Drive and Monroe Street providing
access to City of Little Rock Zoo.
2.Master Street Plan
Master Street Plan reflects no need for this section
of the street.
3.Need for Ri ht-of-Wa on Ad'acent Streets
There is sufficient right-of-way on Zoo Drive and
Monroe Street.
4.Develo ment Potential
Applicant plans to incorporate street in the future
Zoo expansion and parking.
5.Nei hborhood Land Use and Effect
The general area is made up of a mixture of office and
commercial uses.
1
November 29,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:6-23-3126.Nei hborhood Position
City of Little Rock and AHTD are the only abutting
property owners in the subject area.
7.Effect on Public Services or Utilities
Entergy —has no objection to the abandonment.
ARKLA -has no objection to the abandonment.
Southwestern Bell -has no objection to the
abandonment.
Water Works —has no objection.
Wastewater Utility -has no objection.
Fire Department —has no objection.
Neighborhood and Planning —has no objection to
abandonment.
8.Reversionar Ri hts
All Reversionary rights will extend to the property
owner.
9.Public Welfare and Safet Issues
Abandoning this street will have no adverse effects on
the public welfare and safety.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of street abandonment,south of
Zoo Drive,in War Memorial Park.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(November 8,2001)
The application was discussed briefly.Committee forwarded
the item to the full Commission for final approval.
2
November 29,2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:G-23-312
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(November 29,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that applicant failed to
notify abutting property owners.After a brief discussion,
the Commission determined it appropriate to place this item
on the Consent Agenda for deferral.A motion to this effect
was made.The motion to passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0
nays,and 1 absent.
3
Nt..mber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:14 FILE NO.:IU01-14-01 LU01-15-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Geyer Springs East and
Geyer Springs West Planning Districts.
Location:Multiple Locations on Mabelvale Cutoff,Chicot
Road,Geyer Springs Road,Willow Springs Road,
and Green Road.
R~t:A 1:M lt'-y 'ly t 1o -D 'ty R 'd t'.
Area 2:Multi-family to Single Family,and
Single Family &Multi-family to Public
Institutional.Area 3:Area For Future Study to
Mixed Use.Area 4:Area For Future Study to
Single Family.Area 5:Commercial &Single
Family to Public Institutional.
Source:City of Little Rock
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendments in the Geyer Springs-East and Geyer
Springs-West Planning Districts.
The Low Density Residential category accommodates a broad
range of housing types including single family attached,
single family detached,duplex,town homes,multi-family and
patio or garden homes.Any combination of these and
possibly other housing types may fall in this category
provided that the density is between six (6)and ten (10)
dwelling units per acre.
The Single Family category provides for single-family homes
at densities not to exceed 6 dwelling units per acre.Such
residential development is typically characterized by
conventional single family homes,but may also include patio
or garden homes and cluster homes,provided that the density
remain less than six units per acre.
The Public Institutional category includes public and quasi-
public facilities,which provide a variety of services to
the community such as schools,libraries,fire stations,
churches,utility substations,and hospitals.
1
Nc..mber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-14-01 LU01-15-01
The Mixed Use category provides for a mixture of
residential,office and commercial uses to occur.A Planned
Zoning District is required if the use is entirely office or
commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
Area ¹1 is for the entirety of Topaz Court located south off
of Mabelvale Cutoff.This area consists of 3.32+acres of
duplexes zoned R-4 Two-Family.The surrounding property
consists of houses and vacant property zoned R-2 Single
Family.
Area ¹2 is an area on the east side of Chicot Road near the
12600 block north of the abandoned railroad line.This area
has about 13.12+acres of land divided into large tracts.
The Temple Baptist Church is on land zoned R-2 Single Family
Conditional Use Permit.The other tracts of land have houses
built on large lots zoned R-2 Single Family.The
neighboring land to the north and east is vacant land zoned
R-2 Single Family.The property to the south is vacant land
located outside city limits and is not zoned.The vacant
land on the west side of Chicot Road is zoned C-2 Shopping
Center.The property north of Bunch Road is composed of
houses built on large lots zoned R-2 Single Family and an
insulation company located in a Planned Industrial District.
Area ¹3 is north of Green Road on Chicot Road and consists
of 61.04t acres of land characterized by vacant land and
houses built on large lots.All of Area ¹3 is located
outside city limits and is not zoned.The proposed South
Loop dissects this area west to east just north of Walt
Lane.The Bethel Primitive Baptist Church lies at the
northeast corner of Rebel Lane and Chicot Road.
Area ¹4 is on the northeast and northwest corners of Green
Road and Geyer Springs Road.About 19.12t acres of vacant
land make up area four.Most of the surrounding land is
vacant property.The vacant land to the north and west is
zoned R-2 Single Family.The vacant land to the east and
south lies outside city limits and is not zoned.The most
intense use near area four is a golf driving range located
to the east.
2
No.mber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-14-01 LU01-15-01
Area ¹5 is on the northwest corner of Willow Springs and
Hilaro Springs Road.The fifth area consists of 2.66+acres
of land zoned R-2 Single Family,Barnett Memorial Baptist
Church and its parsonage occupy the third area.The houses
built on large lots to the north and west are zoned R-2
Single Family.The land to the east and south lies outside
city limits is not zoned and consists of houses built on
large lots.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On October 5,1999 a change was made from Multi-family to
Mixed Office &Commercial and Commercial in the 9100 block
of Lew Drive about 1 mile northeast of Area ¹1.
On November 4,1997,a change was made from Multi-family to
Single Family on the northwest corner of Bunch Road and
Chicot Road west of Area ¹2.
On November 4,1997 a change was made from Multi-family to
Single Family on the northwest corner of Hillsborough Road
and Chicot Road about 1/3 of a mile north of Area ¹2.
On November 4,1997,a change was made on Mabelvale Cutoff
Road on the north side from Chicot Road to Whispering Pines
Drive and on the north and south sides from Woodridge Drive
to Shiloh Drive from Single Family to Mixed Use starting
about a 4 mile west of Area ¹1.
On November 4,1997 a change was made south of Preston
Street on Chicot Road from Office to Suburban Office about 1
mile northwest of Area ¹1.
Area ¹1 along Topaz Court:This area is shown as Multi-
family on the Future Land Use Plan.All of the surrounding
property is shown as Single Family.
Area ¹2 near 12600 Chicot Road:This area is shown on the
Future Land Use Plan as Multi-Family with a small portion in
the southeast corner of the study area shown as Single
Family.All of the land to the north and east is shown as
Single Family.The neighboring property to the south is
shown as Single Family and a strip of Park/Open Space lies
outside the city limit along the creek.The property to the
west south of Bunch Road is shown as Commercial.
Area ¹3 north of Green Road on Chicot Road:All of area
three is shown as an Area For Future Study on the Future
3
Nc.amber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO LU01 14 01~LU01 15 01
Land Use Plan.All of the land to the west,north,and eastisshownasSingleFamily.The land to the south lies in
Saline County and is outside our exterritorial limit line.
Area ¹4 at Green Road and Geyer Springs Road:The land in
this area is shown as an Area For Future Study on the Future
Land Use Plan.There is a large area of LDR to the northeast
that is predominately duplexes.The remaining area is shown
as Single Family.
Area ¹5 at Willow Springs and Hilaro Springs Road:The
Future Land Use Plan shows the east portion of this area as
Neighborhood Commercial while the west part of area five is
shown as Single Family.The property on the east side of
Hilaro Springs Road is shown as Neighborhood Commercial.
The remainder of the surrounding land is shown as Single
Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Chicot Road and the proposed South Loop are shown on the
Master Street Plan as a Principal Arterials.Msbelvale
Cutoff Road and Geyer Springs Road are shown as Minor
Artezials.Willow Springs Road is shown as a Collector
Street.Green Road is classified as a residential street
with open drainage.A Class I Bikeway is shown on the
proposed South Loop from Mabelvale West Road to Arch Street
Pike.Developments in Areas ¹3,¹4,and ¹5 will be affected
by any developments related to the proposed South Loop and
Class I Bikeway.
PARKS:
The 2001 Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan
proposes an sight-block strategy of providing facilities
within an eight block radius of all residential areas.
Thorn Park is the only listed park in the area and is located
about a half mile northwest of Topaz Court.However,the
plan does show a 100-year floodplain along the banks ofLittleFourcheCreek,Included in the parks Plan is the
"Eight Block Strategy —Neighborhood Service Deficit Areas"
graphic.The study area is one of the areas shown to be in
a deficit of any park provider:city parks,P.O.A.parks,
private parks,schools,or the three Loop trails.Chapter
4
Ni mber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-14-01 LU01-15-01
Seven:Acquisition sets criteria for property acquisition to
meet the overall plan.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The amendment areas lie in an area not covered by a city
recognised neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
Area ¹1 along Topaz Court:This area is a stable residential
neighborhood built on a cul-de-sac.All of the duplexes on
this street are oriented toward the street forming a small
enclave.Future development of multi-family density type
housing is not likely to take place in this built-out
subdivision.This change would recognise existing
conditions.
Area ¹2 near the 12600 block of Chicot Road:This area is
located at the city limit on Chicot Road.Temple Baptist
Church fills a large portion of this study area.The church
and neighboring houses are oriented towards Chicot Road and
form a small stable residential area.This area also has a
distinct boundary at the city limits formed by an old
railroad bed and a stream farther to the south.
Area ¹3 north of Green Road on Chicot Road:This area is
located north of the county line in an area where the
proposed South Loop crosses Chicot Road near Green Road.
The intersection of Chicot and the South Loop,both
principal arterials,is a likely candidate for non-
residential development.This change to Mixed Use from Area
For Future Study is a conservative change for this area thatisnotlikelytochangeinthemid-range future since thereisnofundingforthisportionoftheSouthLoop.
Area ¹4 at Green Road and Geyer Springs Road:This area is
located at the area where the proposed South Loop intersects
Geyer Springs Road.The proposed change to Single Family
from Area For Future Study is a conservative change for this
area that is not likely to change in the mid-range future
since there is no funding for this portion of the South
Loop.
5
N~~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)PILE NO.:LU01-14-01,LU01-15-01
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval.A
motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was
approved with a vote of 10 ages,0 noes and 1 absent.
7
N&.Rmber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:15 MIDTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN
Name:Midtown Neighborhoods Plan
Location:University to Reservoir,Cantrell to Markham
R~t:Approve resolution of support
~ttffR t:
After initial attempts to contact the recognized
neighborhoods in the Markham to Cantrell,University to
Reservoir area,Staff developed background information on
the area and distributed a survey to all residential
addresses in the area.In January 2001,an organizational
meeting was held to start.the neighborhood plan effort.
Some one hundred forty five households were invited to this
meeting.These were the households who indicated a desire
to work on a plan from the almost 4000 households who
received surveys in October 2000.
Based on the survey results and concerns of those present at
the January meeting,topic areas were agreed to and a basic
meeting schedule was set.Two co-chairs were selected,one
from the area west of Mississippi and one from the area east
of Mississippi.A website was established for the committee
members to share and spread information.During the first
few meetings the group was narrowed to approximately 70
households,who still wished to participate.Over the next
six months,the committee met every other Thursday evening,
spending two meetings per topic area.(For these meetings,
attendance ranged from under a dozen to over thirty
citizens.But in all cases the entire group of 70
households received minutes,drafts,etc.).
By June a draft was ready for review.This document was
sent to the six neighborhood groups located within the plan
area,as well as city departments and the Plans Committee of
the Little Rock Planning Commission.No comments were
received from the neighborhood groups or the Commission
(those from the city departments are attached at the back of
this report).In addition,the draft was sent to the 145
1
Ni amber 29,2001
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)MIDTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN
households who had returned cards from the survey.Over the
next couple of months about a dozen comments were returned
for the committee to consider.
A meeting was scheduled for late September 2001,with all
145 households invited,to review the comments and agree to
final draft language for the plan section.The final
development step was a meeting,the second week of October,
where citizens were given 'dots'o place on the most
important issues of the plan.
The issue of most concern raised at this meeting was the
need to protect and improve the overall quality of the area.
While most agree that this is a good area,residents want to
keep it that way.With this plan the residents want to
stress the importance of two actions,one to put in place
and enforce regulations to prevent the parking of RVs,boats
and vehicles (junk)in the front yards of homes in the area.
The second is active enforcement of building and
environmental codes on both owner and rental houses,being
sure to maintain City standards.Closely related is the
desire for improving the conditions of the two public parks
—Meriwether and Reservoir.
Five infrastructure-traffic issues,which the neighborhood
has identified as priorities include three signals:at
Markham and Hughes,Rodney Parham and Van Lee,and
Mississippi and Leawood.The other two infrastructure-
traffic issues are a need to institute a resurfacing program
and to develop a sidewalk plan for the area.The remaining
two high priority issues are to change the Land Use Plan in
the Markham/Lee,University/McKinley area to Mixed Use and
to either make William'Magnet School a neighborhood school
or have neighborhood children make up Little Rock's portion
of the magnet school.With the highest priority issues
selected the committee now is requesting a resolution of
support from the Little Rock Planning Commission.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval
2
N&.~er 29,2001
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)MIDTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS PLAN
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 29,2001)
Walter Malone,Planning Staff reviewed the process used to
develop the plan and turned the presentation over to Elliot
Kumpe.Mr.Kumpe,vice chair of the Planning Committee,
reviewed each objective and highlighted the top priority
items under each objective.Commissioner Faust asked if
those involved would keep working to achieve the things in
the Plan.Mr.Kumpe indicated that they would take a
proactive role.Commissioner Faust stated that many of the
"Action Statements"seemed feasible.
Commissioner Floyd indicated that if the neighborhood is
aware of the Plan and works on it,we have found (in other
areas)that some results can come from the effort.
Commissioner Berry asked if the group was aware there is no
city capital improvement plans to address the capital issues
in this plan.Mr.Kumpe indicated that the group was aware
of the lack of capital financing.
There was a discussion about RVs in the front yards.The
effort a few years ago to outlaw RVs and boats in the front
yard was side lined by the efforts of several groups.
Commissioner Lowry moved approval of the resolution of
support for the Midtown Neighborhood Plan.By a vote of
10 for 0 against the resolution was approved.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE RECORD
DATE dt ~4~A 0~~(crn~f ~
MEMBER E ~if I&/
ALLEN,FRED,JR,v v v
BERRY,CRAIG v
DOWNING,RICHARD rg ~
FAUST,JUDITH v
FLOYD,NORM e a
LOWRY,BOB
v''USE,ROHN ~~
NUNNLEY,OBRAY,JR.
RAHMAN,MIZAN v
RECTOR,BILL
STEBBINS,ROBERT
l g,ls,P
MEMBER
ALLEN,FRED,JR 0,'n.v
BERRY,CRAIG ~~~
DOWNING,RICHARD 5!5dn P.n
v'AUST,JUDITH
FLOYD,NORM v'~
LOWRY,BOB v
v'USE,ROHN V ~u i v
NUNNLEY,OBRAY,JR.
RAHMAN,MIZAN ~~v 0
RECTOR,BILL ~v v
STEBBINS,ROBERT v
Meeting Adjourned ~5A P.M.~AYE ~NAYE ~ABSENT ~ABSTAIN ~RECUSE
November 29,2001
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting was adjourned at 6:56 p.m.
Date 8 +Z
Secreta y Chairman