The URL can be used to link to this page

pc_04 13 2000LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING AND REZONING HEARING MINUTE RECORD APRIL 13,2000 4:00 P.M. I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eleven (11)in number. II.Members Present:Pam Adcock Craig Berry Judith Faust Hugh Earnest Bob Lowry Obray Nunnley,Jr. Herb Hawn Mizan Rahman Richard DowningBillRector Rohn Muse Members Absent:None City Attorney:Steve Giles I LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING AND REZONING HEARING AGENDA APRIL 13,2000 4:00 P.M. I.DEFERRED ITEMS: A.Land Alteration and Landscape Ordinance Review Task Force B.LU99-16-03 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Otter Creek Planning District from Single Family to Commercial for an area north of County Line Road east of Vimy Ridge Road. C.Z-6828 1900 Peachtree Dr.0-3 to 0-2 D.Hilton Inn —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6828-A) II.NEW ITEMS: 1 .Z-3258-A 41 Yacht Club MF-12 to C-3 2.Z —4315 —A 1700 E.Capitol I —2 to C —3 3.Z-6822 3611 Barrow R —3 to C-3 4.Z —6840 Autumn Road R-2 to 0-3 5.Master Street Plan Revisions in the 36 Street corridor 6.Briarwood Neighborhood Action Plan 7.LUOO —01—01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Single Family and Transition to Commercial for 14814-14910 Cantrell Road I I .NEW ITEMS:(Cont.) 8.LUOO-16-05 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Otter Creek Planning District from Commercial to Single Family and Public Institutional;Single Family to Suburban Office,Park/Open Space,Public Institutional, Commercial,Service Trades District and Mixed;Multi Family to Public Institutional;Mixed Commercial Industrial to Mixed Office Commercial,Service Trades District,Commercial and Park/Open Space;and Industrial to Commercial for several separate tracts located along Stagecoach Road between I-430 and County Line Road, along Baseline Road west of I —430,along Otter Creek Road west of I-30 and at 13901 Quail Valley Drive. 9.LUOO-19-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District from Office to Commercial for an area south and west of Champlin Drive and Rahling Road. 10.1999 Ordinance Package 2 1 Pu b ic He a r i n g te m s 2 EE CI T Y ~ 4 1 SG 4 CA 4 4A R K I - 4 FR I L L VA L c 1- 6 3 ~ ~ * I, A . ' S „c I Tl . 12 5 4' IY R GK c RC C K E Y E L RF K c A X E T —AA 26 A WS K G R :3 R. FR A Z I E R = ci '. A I R S Ch 2 UR E R SA TG 'c . JG E G 6" & RA l h E C C YA L ' — 36 LM I 6 " K. 3 XT X K Il h KA C E L I I E ' K ~ L' X O K "A R F E R c6 5 5 FR 4 „' c . MA " ~ SL I h K E R K hc S I ( Uh . Gh SR E - E c KA ' A h S F F , IK R SR S JI G ' F CL IG F ( ( KC LR Il -c FF , ' I I CS T H pl a n n i n g Co m m i s s i o n Ag e n d a Ap r i l 13 20 0 0 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A NAME:Proposed changes to the Landscape and Tree Protection Ordinance,Land Alteration Ordinance and the Buf fer Requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (submitted by the Land Alteration and Landscape Review Task Force). STAFF REPORT The Land Alteration and Landscape Review Task Force was created in July,1998,to review the City of Little Rock' Land Alteration and Landscape Ordinances and make recommendations for possible changes.The Task Force represented a good cross —section of the community and included the following: ~Representatives of the Planning and City Beautiful Commissions ~Landscape Architects ~Developers ~Neighborhood Groups ~Representatives of the League of Women Voters and Tree Streets Early on in the process,the Task Force agreed on work program and to focus first on landscaping,tree protection and land alteration or excavation.The Task Force members reviewed the relevant Little Rock ordinances,as well as ordinances from a number of cities from across the country. The Task Force also heard from various individuals with expertise in tree preservation and development standards. The background work undertaken by the Task Force was very thorough and was valuable to the members in their decision- making process.Understanding what other communities had adopted and implemented proved to be very beneficial in helping the Task Force develop changes that were reasonable and considerate of diverse interests. The changes being proposed are intended to promote strong development standards that will enhance the desirability of Little Rock as a place to live and do business.The recommendations being presented relate to landscaping,tree protection,excavation and zoning buffer requirements. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) Following are the a~aa o'r changes for the three ordinances or sections. ~Calls for use of registered landscape architect for commercial developments over two (2)acres. ~Increases interior landscaping area requirements for certain vehicular use areas. ~Increases tree planting requirements within new parking lots. ~Adds irrigation and soil preparation requirements to enhance preservation of landscaping. ~Increases perimeter landscaping width requirements for vehicular use areas. Tree Protection ~Calls for a permit prior to the removal of trees on all properties except single family residences of less than two acres and area zoned agriculture and forestry (AF) and mining (M). ~Calls for a landscaping and tree preservation plan prior to issuing a permit. ~Calls for preservation and/or an increase planting of trees in buffers and parking lots. ~Provides for increased number of trees in large,barren parking lots. Land Alteration ~Calls for permits prior to land alteration or tree clearing. ~Revises grading standards. ~Requires landscaping of slopes and cuts. ~Provides for penalties and corrective measures for unlawful excavation. Buffer Re irements ~Increases street and land use buffers. ~Street classifications would no longer be used to determine maximum buffer width adjacent to the street. 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) The Task Force met on a regular basis for approximately eighteen months and held two public input meetings.In addition to the community sessions,the Task Force also met with developers and other interested parties on two additional occasions.The Task Force took the full 18 months to finalize and agree on the changes because the members felt it was necessary to try to address the issues or concerns that had been raised during the process. .Because of the diverse input and comments,every effort was made to reach an acceptable compromise on a number of the proposed changes.The Task Force members feel that they listened and the recommended ordinance amendments are the result of a comprehensive and open process. The Task Force members voted unanimously to accept the proposed changes at their December 29,1999 meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARr 20,2000) Tony Bozynski,Department of Planning and Development staff, introduced the item and then reviewed several changes that were omitted from the written drafts included in the agendas.The changes were found in the Landscape Ordinance and the tree protection section drafts. John Baker,a member of the Land Alteration and Landscape Review Task Force,then made a presentation about the proposed ordinances.Mr.Baker referred to slides during his presentation and provided the Commission with some background and history.He also reviewed the charge of the Task Force and then reviewed some of the major changes proposed for the Landscape and Tree Protection Ordinance, the Land Alteration Ordinance and zoning buffer requirements.Mr.Baker then introduced task force members that were present:Dottie Funk,Bob Callans,Troy Laha, Mark Johnson,Ramsey Ball,Mary Underwood and Herb Hawn. Ethel Ambrose,a member of the Coalition of Little Rock Neighborhoods and Central High Neighborhood Association, spoke in support of the proposed changes.Ms.Ambrose saiditwasagoodbeginningandindicatedtheneedformore changes in the future.Ms.Ambrose also gave a brief description of the Central High Urban Forestry Project. 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) Sonja McCauley said she supported the changes and thanked the Task Force members for their time and effort. Ruth Bell,representing the League of Women Voters,said the League strongly supported the proposed changes and described various sections.Ms.Bell read from a written statement and said the modifications strengthened the current requirements and standards. Pam Adcock,Planning Commission Chair,read a statement from Margaret Leigh supporting the changes. David Jones,a commercial realtor,said that additional time was needed to review the changes and made reference to a letter from Dickson Flake.Mr.Jones asked that the item be deferred. Hank Kelley,Flake and Kelley,addressed the Commission and described several existing projects and how the proposed changes could impact them.Mr.Kelley said that retailers drive developers and the development.Mr.Kelley also said that there would be a reduction in floor space on a site because of the proposed changes.Mr.Kelley also requested that the issue be deferred. Jim Irwin suggested using existing developments to review the proposed changes and said a deferral was needed. Johnny Kincaid said the task force needed to quantify the changes and analyze the potential impacts.Mr.Kincaid said the proposed changes could cause a 20%reduction in buildable area.Mr.Kincaid indicated that he agreed with 50 to 60 percent of the proposed changes and said a reasonable solution should be reached on the remaining portions. John Flake spoke and a suggested a deferral for further study. Peggy Wilhem,representing the Sierra Club,spoke in support of the proposed changes. Nick Holmes said the proposed changes could require 20-25 percent additional land for increased buffers,etc.and asked for more time. 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) Greg Mueller asked that the item be deferred and then described the potential impact on some existing projects. Mr.Mueller indicated that a 140,000 square foot development would be reduced to approximately 82,000 square feet and a 79,500 square foot building would lose about 20,000 square feet.Mr.Mueller said that the task force's work needed more analysis. Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,expressed concerns with the possibility of needing additional staff because of the changes and not having the necessary resources to fund one or more positions. Comments were then offered by several commissioners.Hugh Earnest said it was a reasonable request to develop numbers based on the changes and mentioned the idea of raising public funds for open space.Richard Downing questioned whether the city could require existing parking lots to conform to the new standards and said the city should consider acquiring land to preserve open space.Bill Rector discussed older areas and the potential impacts. John Baker responded to some of the comments and said the changes included some incentives for the central city.Mr. Baker discussed existing parking lots and described some of the changes. Commissioner Judith Faust made some comments and said the bigger issue was preserving green space and there were some major questions that needed to be addressed.Commissioner Faust also expressed some concerns with defining mature area and staff's apparent lack of support. Hank Kelley addressed the Commission and offered the use of an engineer to assist with reviewing the changes. There was a long discussion and comments were offered by various commissioners.Several commissioners said a deferral was the right course. Additional comments were made and the Commission said that answers were needed on costs and potential impacts.It was agreed that the following needed to be addressed before the next meeting. 1.Define mature area. 2.Apply proposed standards to several existing sites. 5 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) 3.Review one or two undeveloped sites using proposed standards. 4.Develop a budget for enforcing new standards. 5.Whether it is legal to require existing parking lots to be brought up to the new standards. A motion was made to defer the item to the March 2,2000 Planning Commission hearing.The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 2,2000) John Baker,a member of the Land Alteration and Landscape Review Task Force,made a brief presentation and updated the Planning Commission on the task force efforts to address the various issues that were raised at the January 20,2000 hearing.Mr.Baker said that the task force had selected Frank Riggins,with the Mehlburger Firm,to provide the comparisons for several sites,developed and undeveloped. Mr.Baker also said that the task force is working with thestaffondefiningmatureareasandthetaskforce,by vote, had clarified their position on existing parking lots. Mr.Baker indicated that the task force should have the requested information ready for review at the April 13 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Richard Downing asked several questions about amortization of existing parking lots.John Baker said thatstaffhadforwardedarequestforanopiniontotheCity Attorney's Office,but he did not know the status of the request.Stephen Giles,Deputy City Attorney,said that issue was being researched.Commissioner Downing asked that the opinion be part of the information presented to the Commission on April 13. The item was deferred to the April 13,2000 meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) Tony Bozynski,Department of Planning and Development,made some brief comments about the task force report analyzing several sites and prepared by the Mehlburger Firm.Mr. Bozynski then introduced Frank Riggins,of the Mehlburger Firm,and said Mr.Riggins would review the report developedfortheLandAlterationandLandscapeReviewTaskForce. 6 I April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) Frank Riggins addressed the Planning Commission and said the report studied five sites and compared current requirements against the ordinance changes being proposed by the task force.Mr.Riggins said that every site was unique. Mr.Riggins indicated that some assumptions were made in the study and some basic cost information was found in the report,but it was difficult to quantify all costs because the sites were different.Mr.Riggins then proceeded to review each of the five sites.The first site was the credit union development at Chester and West Capitol. Mr.Riggins said the proposed standards would require some modifications to the site plan.Next site was the Bristol Park Apartments on Mara Lynn and Mr.Riggins said the development meets or exceeds the proposed requirements, except along Mara Lynn.The third site was the Arkansas Heart Hospital on Shackleford Road,a 12 acre development, and Mr.Riggins said the impacts from the proposed changes would be minimal.The next site to be reviewed by Mr. Riggins was Chenal Place,a 4 lot retail development on Chenal Parkway.Mr.Riggins said the project would lose some parking and the site plan would require some minor modifications.Mr.Riggins indicated that Chenal Place would experience more impacts from the proposed ordinance changes.The final project was the proposed Immanuel Baptist Church site on Shackleford and Mr.Riggins said the plan meets all the new requirements. Mr.Riggins continued his presentation by discussing costs and said the development costs for the five sites would increase from 2.4%to 16%.He said each site was going to differ and that was why the cost increases vary so much. At this point,questions were asked by the Planning Commission.Mr.Riggins responded and said saving existing trees could be a significant cost and additional cost increases would come from fees,survey work,etc.He also indicated the review process would probably take more time. Mr.Riggins felt that professional fees could increase 30% to 40%because of the proposed changes. John Baker,a member of the task force,addressed the commission and responded to the study and comments made by Frank Riggins.Mr.Baker then said the task force had answered specific questions that were raised by the commission at the January hearing.Mr.Baker discussed tree preservation and funding for enforcement and said it could 7 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) be done.Mr.Baker then asked the supporters of the proposed changes to stand and a large number in attendance did.Mr.Baker continued by commenting on the developers'roposalandsaidthetaskforcehadfourmeetings with developers.He also said the task force held two public meetings.Mr.Baker concluded by saying he was against a deferral and asked the commission to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. Matt Bradley spoke in support of the proposed ordinances and presented a slide show.Mr.Bradley discussed the Highway 10 and Sam Peck Road site and made some general comments about trees.Mr.Bradley said that Little Rock needs development with lasting value and the existing ordinances need to be improved. Ann Nicholson said the proposed ordinances address all that was needed and asked the Commission to approve the ordinances in their entirety. Eulalia Araoz,member of the group supporting the ordinances,spoke and expressed concerns with future costsiftheordinanceswerenotadopted.Ms.Araoz said lawsuits would be filed and the clear cutting would continue.Ms. Araoz said the ordinances impact the quality of life and asked the Commission to make a positive recommendation to the Board of Directors. Vivian Davis,Little Rock Garden Club,said the Garden Club voted to endorse the ordinances. Alice Andrews spoke in support of the proposed changes. Hank Kelley,acknowledged the task force's work and said that the task force,in his opinion,was not balanced.Mr. Kelley commented on the Mehlburger report and discussed other sites.Mr.Kelley said the parking for office development by Pavilion in the Park would be reduced by 23% because of the new requirements and a 24't reduction in building mass for the Bowman Curve development would occur. He mentioned some changes being suggested by the developers and said the development community met with the task force several times and they still had concerns with several aspects of the proposed ordinances.Mr.Kelley went on to say that some of the provisions come close to being a taking. 8 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) Jack McCray addressed the Commission and said the work of the task force has a lot of merit,but moves the bar too far.Mr.McCray asked the Commission to consider the amendments being suggested by the development community. Jim Irwin spoke and said that some developments would experience a decrease in available land because of the new requirements.Mr.Irwin asked the Commission to consider incorporating the amendments suggested by the developers. Ramsay Ball,a task force member,spoke and said the task force developed a basis for a good ordinance.Mr.Ball suggested that more time would benefit both sides and the task force could continue their work. Jim Whitmore,a small property owner downtown,requested a deferral.Mr.Whitmore said there was no real opportunity for input and more time was needed.Mr.Whitmore went on to say that the task force and developers were very close and refer the ordinances back to the task force for 90 days. Mr.Whitmore made some additional comments and asked that Dottie Funk resign from the task force. Bob Shults voiced concerns with some of the proposed changes and said that Children's Hospital could lose between 100 and 160 parking spaces because of the new standards. Gene Pfeifer indicated that the developers now agree with 80%of the changes being suggested by the task force and hefeltthetwosideswerecloseenoughtohaveajoint agreement.Mr.Pfeifer then expressed some concerns with the drip line and critical root zone provisions. At this point,the Planning Commission took a break. (During the break,the League of Women Voters submitted a written statement to the staff.) The meeting was called to order. A motion was made to defer the item to the May 11 meeting and for the task force to meet with the developers to discuss the list of suggested changes submitted by the developers.The motion was seconded.An amendment to the motion was made and seconded to hire a facilitator in five calendar days to 9 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:A (Cont.) meet with both sides to attempt to reach agreement on the ordinances.(The amendment dies if the individual is not hired during the five day period.) There was lengthy discussion before a vote on the motion. Commissioner Craig Berry voiced concerns with the proposed ordinances including some of the items that did not meet good urban design standards;the 25%reduction for the mature areas was not enough;the buffer requirements should be variable buffers and the task force's proposal was flawed;and suggested that the in lieu provision should be 50%private and 50%public. Commissioner Bob Lowry asked the two sides to work together and come back with an ordinance that could be approved. Commissioner Bill Rector said he had some problems with the appeal procedure and the joint and several liability provision.Commissioner Rector also voiced some concerns with enforcement of the ordinances. Jane Dickey,president of the Downtown Partnership, requested more time to allow the Partnership to study the ordinances and make a report. Gene Pfeifer spoke again and commented on Matt Bradley' slides.Mr.Pfeifer said he would prefer to plant trees and not be subject to having to save the trees.Mr.Pfeifer made some comments about enforcement and an adequate budget. Commissioner Judith Faust said that she supported the deferral so the ordinance that goes to the Board of Directors was not divided. The Commission voted on the motion to defer the item to May 11 and to hire a facilitator in five calendar days.The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. Chair Pam Adcock announced a special Planning Commission meeting on April 27,2000.(The meeting will be held in the Board of Directors Chambers,2"floor,City Hall,and beginat3:30 p.m.). 10 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:LUOO-16-03 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Otter Creek Planning District Location:12800 County Line Road. Receuest:Single Family to Commercial Source:Doug Loftin PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Otter Creek Planning District from-Single Family to Commercial.The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale of products, personal and professional services,and general business activities.Commercial activities very in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they serve.The applicant wishes to develop the property under review for a day care center and a mini-storage warehouse. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned R-2 Single Family Residential and is approximately 3.54 +acres in size.The property to the north and east is zoned R-2 Single Family Residential and is occupied by the Irish Spring subdivision. A convenience store is located to the west on a piece of property zoned C-3 General Commercial at the northeast corner of the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road intersection. The property to the south lies in Saline County and in the city limits of Shannon Hills.It is zoned R-1 Single Family.Directly across county Line road lies Davis Elementary school,part of the Bryant School district. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On November 4,1997 three changes took place from Low Density Residential to Single Family along both sides of Vimy Ridge Road with in a mile north of the applicant's property. On November 4,1997 a change was made from Low Density Residential to Commercial at the northwest corner of the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road intersection about 300 feet west of the applicant's property. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-03 In November 21,1995 various changes were made on both sides of Vimy Ridge Road on large tracts of land within a mile north of the applicant'property,one of those changes included the change Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial west of the applicant's property on the northeast corner of the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road intersection west of the applicant's property. The applicant'properties,as well as the property to the north and east,are all shown as Single Family on the Land Use Plan West of the applicant'property are two areas shown as Commercial on the northwest and northeast corners of Vimy Ridge Road and County Line Road.The area to the south of the applicant's property is located in Saline County.The Shannon Hills Comprehensive Development Plan shows the southwest corner of the intersection as Commercial and the southeast corner as Park/Elementary school.The remainder of the area along Vimy Ridge Road and County line road is shown as Residential. MASTER STREET PLAN: Vimy Ridge Road is shown as a minor arterial from Alexander Road to the Saline County line.County Line Road is shown as a minor arterial from Vimy Ridge Road with a proposed extension east as a minor arterial to connect to the proposed South Loop.Vimy Ridge Road is also shown as continuing south from the County Line through Shannon Hills as a minor arterial on the Central Arkansas Transit System (CARTS)Future Classification Plan.The CARTS Future Classification Plan shows County Line Road as a major collector from Vimy Ridge Road to the Donnie Drive /Joan Drive intersection in Shannon Hills.Both the Master Street Plan and the CARTS Future Classification Plan show County Line Road continuing west from the intersection with Vimy Ridge Road as a residential street. PARKS: The Master Parks Plan does not show any parks,existing or proposed,effected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The Chicot West /I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan states the recommendation of concentrating "...development efforts in 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO —16-03 the more urbanized northern portion of the study area..."and "...view the southern portion of the study area as an 'urban reserve'o be developed as market forces become stronger in the area."This amendment is located next to the southern boundary of the study area. ANALYS I S: Much of the area surrounding the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road intersection consists of large tracts of undeveloped land in a semi —rural setting.R.L.Davis Elementary School lies across the street from the applicant's. Commercial uses across from a school on a street may cause traffic conflicts from both the loading and unloading of school students and the commercial traffic throughout the day.The undeveloped tract of land on the southwest corner of the intersection provides for future development of commercial areas. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Meyer Lane Neighborhood Association,Otter Creek Homeowners Association,Quail Run Neighborhood Association,and Rolling Pines Neighborhood Association. Staff has received 17 comments from area residents.None are in support and 17 are opposed to the change. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is premature and therefore not appropriate.The area shown as Commercial on the southwest corner of the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road intersection provides an area for future Commercial uses.This area will be reviewed in a year or so as part of the Chicot West I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan review. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 2,2000) Brian Minyard,of Staff,presented the item to the Commission. Doug Loftin,the applicant,stated that the property was improperly zoned R-2 residential instead of multi-family. 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO —16 —03 The applicant would prefer a commercial zoning,but if denied,would want a multi-family zoning.Mr.Loftin gave a description of his proposed development. Joe Longinotti spoke in opposition to the item.Mr. Longinotti opposed the development of either commercial property or a day care center,next to his property. Donna Jones spoke in opposition to the item.Ms.Jones expressed concern that a the proposed development would flood her property and complained that the gas station on the corner of Vimy Ridge and County Line Road caused flooding on her property. Michelle Ready spoke in opposition to the item.Ms.Ready stated that development of the applicant's property would cause drainage problems and added concerns about noise form a daycare facility.Ms.Ready closed by adding a concern about the potential for increased traffic in the area. Chair Pam Adcock asked if several options could work to develop the property without a land use plan change to commercial.The applicant expressed an interest in construction of either a day care center or development of residential units. Winston Simpson,Superintendent of Bryant School District, spoke in opposition to the item.Mr.Simpson expressed concerns about the safety of children attending,and walking to Davis Elementary School.Mr.Simpson stated that he did not oppose development of a day care on the property,but opposed commercial development on the property. Mack Blann spoke in opposition to the item.Mr.Blann stated that any development would hurt the property values of area residents and added that he would prefer that the property in question would be developed for residential purposes.The speaker closed his remarks with concerns about drainage. Doug Loftin requested a deferral on the item.Mr.Loftin wanted time to arrive at a consensus with the area property owners on the issue of how to best develop the property in question. 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-03 Commissioner Mizan's expressed thanks for participation and comments made by a representative of the Bryant School District in the meeting. Commissioner Hawn requested that the Public Works Department study the drainage issue in the vicinity of the property discussed in this item. Commissioner Downing expressed concern about improperly zoning of the property in question made by Mr.Loftin. Mr.Lawson,city staff,stated that the property in question is zoned R-2 Single Family,but if a mistake was made,city staff would request that the Board of Directors change the zoning of the property back to the original zoning. A motion was made to defer the item to the April 13 meeting and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 22,2000 meeting to coincide with a Planned Development application.A motion was made to accept the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 5 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z —6828 Owner:Herrington Hotel Group,LLC Applicant:Frank Riggins, The Mehlburger Firm Location:1900 Peachtree Drive Request:Rezone from 0-3 to 0-2 Purpose:Proposed new hotel (see associated Hilton Inn C.U.P.,File No.Z —6828 —A) Size:5+acres Existing Use:Vacant,undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —Westlake Corporate Park Of f ice Development; zoned 0-3 South —Undeveloped;zoned 0-3 and I-430 right-of-wayEast—Westlake Corporate Park Office Development; zoned 0-3 West —Undeveloped;zoned OS and O-l and Sandpiper Neighborhood pool and residences;zoned R-2 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS With Construction: 1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.All sidewalk needs to be placed in right-of-way. 2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance 18,031.Verify sight distance and spacing with existing driveway for proposed driveways. 4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.5.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z —6828 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The site is not located on a CATA bus route. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All owners of property within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet and the Sandpiper Neighborhood Association were notified of the rezoning request. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is located in the I-430 Planning District.The Land Use Plan recommends SO,Suburban Office,for this tract as well as the remainder of the large multibuilding office park development adjacent to the site,Westlake Office Park. The property is being proposed for rezoning from 0 —3 General Office District to 0-2 Office and Institutional District,adistrictwhichrequiressiteplanreviewbythePlanning Commission.As such,staff believes the zoning is appropriate and no plan change is necessary. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this undeveloped 5.061+acre tract from "0-3"General Office to"0-2"Office and Institutional District.An associatedconditionalusepermitapplicationhasbeenfiled,proposing development of a hotel on the site.Hotels are not a permitted use within the 0-3 district but are permitted as aconditionalusein0-2. The property is located at the southern edge of Westlake Corporate Park (formerly Koger Office Park),a large,multibuilding office development.The 0-3 zoned office parkextendstothenorthandgenerallyeastofthissite. Westlake currently consists of 6,large office buildingsbuiltinaparksettingaroundasmalllake.A smaller, undeveloped 0-3 zoned parcel is located south of this site,across Peachtree Drive.The I-430 right-of-way is immediately further south.Across Centerview Drive,to the northwest,a wide OS zoned strip separates the Sandpiper Neighborhood from an additional larger area of 0-1 and 0-3 zoned properties.The office zoned tracts closest to Centerview Dr.are currently undeveloped.Immediately 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z —6828 across Centerview Dr.,to the southwest of the subject property,is the entrance to the Sandpiper residential neighborhood.The neighborhood swimming pool is located at the intersection of Peachtree and Centerview.Single family homes are located on the properties beyond the pool. The 0-2 zoning request is compatible with zoning and uses in the area.0-2 requires site plan review by the Planning Commission.This additional level of review,which the current 0-3 zoning does not require,will prove beneficial in determining development of the site with its sensitive proximately to the neighborhood. The I-430 district Land Use Plan recommends Suburban Office for this tract and for the rest of the existing,0-3 zoned Westlake Corporate Park.Rezoning the tract to 0-2,withitsrequirementofsiteplanreview,brings the propertyclosertotheintentoftheSuburbanOfficedesignation.As such,staff believes no plan amendment is necessary. Site plan review can be accomplished through the Planning Commission's review of a conditional use permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staf f recommends approval of the requested 0 —2 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000) The applicant was present.There were several interested parties present,both in support and in opposition.There were only 8 commissioners present and the applicant was offered the opportunity to defer the item.After a brief discussion,the applicant accepted deferral. A motion was made to defer the item to the April 13,2000 meeting.The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) The applicant was present.There was one objector present who did not turn in a card to speak until after the item had been acted upon.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.This item was discussed concurrently with the associated conditional use permit 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828 (Z-6828 —A).Staff informed the Commission that a meeting was held by the applicant,with staff and neighborhood residents,after the March 30,2000 Commission meeting. Staff stated that the applicant had addressed many neighborhood concerns and it was felt that there was no longer much opposition to the proposed hotel development. Wes Lowder,representing the applicant,presented a site plan of the proposed hotel and briefly described the development. Commissioner Adcock asked Mr.Lowder about possible traffic impact on Peachtree Drive.Mr.Lowder responded that the Hilton reservation map will direct customers to the site via a route other than Peachtree Drive.Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,commented that the proposed hotel will have a minimal impact on the Peachtree Drive/Shackleford Road intersection because of the varied traffic pattern of hotel guests and employees. Commissioner Lowry commented that he had attended the informational meeting after the March 30,2000 commission meeting and felt it was very positive. A motion was made to approve the requested 0-2 zoning. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. After the item was approved,Larry Sipes of 2907 Peachtree Drive addressed the Commission.He stated that the neighborhood association had failed to properly inform neighborhood residents of the issue.Dana Carney,of the Planning Staff,outlined the notice procedure and explained that it was followed properly.The commission commented that Mr.Sipes should speak with the association president about doing a better job of notifying residents. 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z —6828 —A NAME:Hilton Inn —Conditional Use Permit LOCATION:1900 Peachtree Drive OWNER/APPLICANT:Herrington Hotel Group LLC PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for a 4-story,167 room hotel with a small lounge and small eating area off the lobby area,located on the northeast corner of Peachtree and Centerview Drives at 1900 Peachtree Drive.The property is proposed to be re-zoned from 0-3,General Office to 0-2,Office and Institutional District,by accompanying Item 17 on this same agenda. ORD INANCE DE S I GN S TANDARD S: 1.SITE LOCATION: This site is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Peachtree and Centerview Drives,on the southwest edge of a large business park development. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: This 5 —acre site is currently zoned 0 —3,but there is an accompanying item on this agenda to rezone the property to 0-2.The surrounding zoning contains a mix of R-2 Single Family Residential to the southeast and southwest,0-3 General Office,to the north and south, and OS Open Space,and 0-1 Quiet Office to the west and northwest.The Sandpiper Subdivision is located just to the southwest of this site.Their pool and clubhouse is located across Centerview,to the west.There is also a large PCD for the Summit Mall site on the south side ofI-430. Staff believes that with the amount of natural vegetation that the applicant proposes to leave untouched,plus the vegetation they will replant,that the site would be compatible with the surrounding area. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:2 —6828-A The Sandpiper Neighborhood Association was notified of the public hearing. 3 .ON S I TE DRIVE S AND PARKING: There would be two access points to this site.The main entrance would be from Peachtree,with a secondary access from Centerview,primarily for deliveries. The applicant has planned for 178 parking spaces.The proposed 167-room hotel would generate a parking requirement of 183 spaces based on one space for each guestroom plus 10%of that total. 4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. Because of the grade elevation changes,cross sections showing proposed methods to handle these changes should be provided. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree coveredsite.Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six inch caliper or larger. 5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: a.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.All sidewalk needs to be place in right-of —way. b.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.c.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance 18,031.Verify sight distance and spacing with existing driveway for proposed driveways.(250feetspacing) d.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. e.Easements for proposed stormwater detentionfacilitiesarerequired. 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.j FILE NO.:Z-6828 —A f.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31—403 of the Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering. 6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS: Water:An acreage charge of $150.00 per acre applies in addition to normal charges.Due to the nature of this facility,installation of a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer will be required on the domestic water service for this facility. Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements to serve property.Capacity analysis required,contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details. Southwestern Bell:No comments received. ARKLA:No comments received. Entergy:Approved as submitted. Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per code. CATA:There is no bus service in this area. 7 .STAFF ANALYS I S: The applicant has requested a conditional use permit for a 4-story,167-room hotel on property that they expect to be zoned 0-2,Office and Institutional.There is an accompanying item on this agenda to rezone this property from 0-3 to 0-2.The proposed uses include a small eating area and a small lounge,both of which are designed for use primarily by hotel guests.The lounge would not be used for bands or other entertainment.It's more of an open sitting area in the lobby area. This site is located in a mixture of Office, Residential,and Open Space zoning.It is at the entrance to the Sandpiper Subdivision. The proposed plan exceeds setback requirements of 25 feet on all sides,and is within the height limit of 78 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z —6828 —A feet.The amount of parking proposed is considered adequate even though it is 5 spaces below the minimum required.A variance would be required for the reduced parking. The applicant has requested they be allowed to place a sign,consisting of individual metal letters,on the retaining wall near the entrance drive from Peachtree. The ordinance prohibits signs on walls,but Staff feels this would be a reasonable variance request and blend in better with the surroundings. Staff believes that this would be a reasonable use of the site,and that the site would be compatible with the surrounding area considering the amount of natural vegetation that the applicant proposes to leave untouched,plus the vegetation they will replant. 8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance with the following conditions: a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances. b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.Comply with Fire Department Comment. d.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and directed downward and inward to the property and not towards any residential zoned area. Staff also recommends approval of variances for a reduced number of parking spaces,and a sign on the retaining wall near the Peachtree entrance drive. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000) Frank Riggins was present representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. Public works reviewed their comments,concentrating particularly on the sight distance question for the driveway on Centerview.They stated that the distance was 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6828-A satisfactory,but that the driveway spacing to the next driveway north along Centerview needed to be 275 feet to provide the needed sight distance. Other Staff members reviewed the signage and parking requirements and noted the variances needed for both.The applicant confirmed the 24-hour operation for the hotel. Staff asked the applicant to provide the proposed square footage for the restaurant and lounge. There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000) Wes Lowder,Mehlburger Firm,and Rick Martin,Herrington Hotel Group,were present representing the application. There were several interested parties,for and against, present.At the request of Chairperson Adcock,Mr.Carney of the City Planning Staff explained the Commission's policy whenever there are eight or fewer Commissioners present at a hearing that an applicant can request deferral without it being counted against them. Mr.Lowder asked for an explanation of options available to allow those that did attend to speak and then still requestdeferral.After a short discussion and comments from Commissioners stating their preference to hear all the comments at one hearing,Mr.Lowder chose to request deferral until the April 13 Public Hearing. A motion was made to defer the application until the April 13,2000,Public Hearing.The motion passed by a voteof8ayes,0 nays and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) Wes Lowder,from The Mehlburger Firm,was present representing the application.There were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the item with a 5 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828 —A recommendation for approval subject to compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above. Mr.Carney from the Planning Staff updated the Commission about a meeting that was held immediately after the hearing on March 30 between the applicants and individuals from the neighborhood.The meeting answered many of the neighborhood concerns and the consensus of those present seemed to be much more supportive. Mr.Lowder briefly reviewed the proposal and meetings held with the neighborhood association.He commented about the large size of the landscape buffers they included in the plan,and stated he didn'feel an office complex on this site could stand to leave that size of a buffer.He added that the retaining walls would match the style of the rest of the West Lake Office Complex in which this site exists. Chairperson Adcock asked about traffic at Peachtree and Shackleford.She suggested that the hotel direct their customers down Centerview and Executive Center Drive to the traffic signal onto Shackleford to reduce traffic at Peachtree and Shackleford.She next asked Mr.Turner,Public Works Director,about how to deal with a traffic problem at Peachtree and Shackleford,should it develop.Mr.Turner stated that he didn'expect a problem to develop because the nature of hotel traffic would not have particular peak times like an office building would.He added that even the schedule of hotel staff shift changes would not coincide with the normal workday peak times.Mr.Turner did not anticipate that the hotel would cause any concern at the Peachtree/Shackleford intersection. Commissioner Lowry commented that he attended that meeting after the March 30 hearing and said it showed what could be done when two sides meet together and talk things out.He was impressed by how it was handled on both sides and thanked all participants for their participation. A motion was made to approve the application as submitted to include staff comments and recommendations,and the applicant'concessions.The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes,0 nays and 0 absent. 6 I April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:Z-3258-A Owner:Hastings Bay Marina Applicant:H.Lee Hastings Location:¹1 Yacht Club Drive Reques t:Rezone from MF-12 to C-3 Purpose:Construction of additional marina facility building Size:2.7+acres Existing Use:Metal building under construction SURROUND ING LAND USE AND ZONING Nor th —Yacht Club;zoned C-3 South —Wooded,single family across Yacht Club Drive; zoned R-2 East —Yacht Club;zoned C-3 West —Pond;zoned MF-12 PUBL I C WORKS COMMENT S 1.It appears that dedicated road stops at the entrance to Marina.Public Works requests that sufficient turn- around right —of-way be dedicated and turn around be constructed. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The site is not located on a CATA bus route. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and the River Valley Property Owners Association were notified of the rezoning request.The site is outside of the city limits and staff does not have a database to notify residents within 300 feet. Apri1 13,2000 ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3258-A LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is located in the Pinnacle Planning District.The adopted Plan is reflective of the current zoning,showing commercial for that part of the Yacht Club property which is zoned C-3 and Multifamily for the subject property,the pond and the MF-12 zoned property west of the pond.The subject property is separated from the remainder of the MF-12 property by the pond and is more closely aligned with the remainder of the commercial Yacht Club development.The Plan is general in nature and did not take into consideration physical elements such as the pond which provides a reasonable separation between the existing Yacht Club development and the properties west of the pond. The property is not within an area covered by a neighborhood action plan.No action plan is proposed for the near future. STAFF ANALYS I S The request before the Commission is to rezone this 2.7 acretractfromMF-12 Multifamily to C-3 General Commercial.A new building is being constructed on the site by the Little Rock Yacht Club.The site is located outside of the City and no building permits are required.The applicant began construction of the building under the impression that the property was zoned commercial,the same as the remainder of the Yacht Club property. The property is located at the end of Yacht Club Drive which dead-ends at the Yacht Club property.The Yacht Clubfacilities,including boat slips and docks,maintenance and sales business are located north and west of this tract.A pond is adjacent to the west.A new,20 lot,5 acre tract subdivision is in the early phases of development beyond the pond,southwest of the site.One single family home on a large tract is located across Yacht Club Drive south of thesite.The tract is within the Yacht Club use area and is separated from residential by the pond.In staff's opinion, the proposed zoning is compatible with the existing development. The Pinnacle District Land Use Plan mirrors the zoning map. The Plan is general in nature and did not take into 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3258-A consideration such physical elements as the pond.Staff believes the commercial zoning meets the intent of the Plan and the pond should be used as the separation between the commercial Yacht Club development and the residential properties to the west. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staf f recommends approval of the requested C —3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. Commissioner Earnest expressed concern about the amount of new development occurring in the Maumelle Basin. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:Z-4315-A Owner:Mildred Calvin Applicant:Mildred Calvin Location:1700 East Capitol Avenue Request:Rezone from I-2 to C-3 Purpose:Continue to utilize existing building as bar and grill/private club. Size:.34 acres Existing Use:Bar and grill SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —Vacant lots and boarded residence;zoned R-4 South —Vacant lot and boarded residence;zoned C —3 and R-4 East —Single Family,zoned R-4 West —Vacant lots;zoned I —3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS 1.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is requiredatthecornerofBondandCapitol. With Buildin Permit 2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(MasterStreetPlan).Construct one —half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. 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 Ordinance 18,031. 5.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4315-A PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT A CATA bus route is located at East 6 and Bond Streets, one block south of this site. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet and the East End Civic League, East Little Rock and Hanger Hill Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning request. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is located in the East Little Rock Planning District.The adopted Plan recommends commercial for the tract.The C-3 zoning request conforms to the Plan.The property is located in an area which is not covered by a neighborhood action plan.No action plan is proposed for the near future.Development of the Clinton Presidential Library Park several blocks west of the site may drive a neighborhood action plan at some point. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .34 acre tract from I-2 Light Industrial to C-3 General Commercial. The property is occupied by a parking lot and a one-story building housing a bar and grill.The bar is a nonconforming use.A prospective buyer of the site wishes to have the property rezoned to eliminate the hazards of nonconformity.C-3 is the appropriate zoning for the use. The property is located at the northeast corner of Bond and East Capitol.The surrounding neighborhood is characterized by vacant lots and boarded residential structures although there are a few occupied homes scattered in the immediate vicinity.Vacant lots and a boarded residence are adjacent to the north.A vacant C-3 zoned lot and a boarded residence are located to the south,across East Capitol Avenue.Vacant I-3 and I-2 zoned lots are located across Bond Street,to the west.Two single family homes are adjacent to the east.A large area of industrial properties 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4315-A and uses extends westward to I-30.This property is located on Bond Street which serves as the dividing line between the industrial uses and the primarily residential zoned properties extending to the east.Eliminating this industrial zoning on the east side of Bond Street and bringing the zoning into conformance with the Land Use Plan is appropriate.The site is bordered with a 6 foot tall privacy fence on the north and east,separating the property from the adjacent residential properties.No changes are proposed for the site in the immediate future although a later expansion is a possibility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) The applicant,Mildred Calvin,was present.There were three objectors present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.Ms.Calvin stated that she would reserve her comments until after the objectors spoke. Ella Gilbert,owner of property at 1709 East Capitol,spoke against the rezoning.Ms.Gilbert stated that she was tired of picking up trash left by patrons of the bar at 1700 East Capitol.She stated that her house had burnt and she was hesitant to rebuild it because of the bar. Wesley Townsend,pastor of Macedonia Baptist Church at 3 and Bender,spoke against the rezoning.Terry Thomas,also of the church,spoke in opposition. Mildred Calvin stated she was not aware of the problems cited by Ms.Gilbert and that she wished Ms.Gilbert had approached her with her concerns.Ms.Calvin commented that the bar and grill had been in business for many years. Rev.Townsend commented that he did not want the bar andgrillturnedintoaprivateclub.Dana Carney,of the Planning Staff,explained the nonconforming status of the property and noted that it could be a private club under its current nonconforming status.At Commissioner Berry's request,Mr.Carney listed several uses permitted under the current I-2 zoning. 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4315-A Commissioner Nunnley told Rev.Townsend that the requested C-3 zoning was compatible with uses in the area and with the Land Use Plan.He asked Rev.Townsend if the church had thought about buying the property.Rev.Townsend responded that the church had not.He stated that he did not want the bar to be able to expand,which it could if the property was rezoned. Commissioner Rector asked staff if the building could be expanded,if the site was rezoned.Mr.Carney responded that he had not studied the issue but that it appeared thatitwouldbedifficulttoexpandthebuilding,with the small size of the property and the limited area available for parking. Commissioner Hawn commented that he understood the neighbors'oncerns but the nonconforming use wasn'going to "go away." A motion was made to approve the requested C —3 zoning. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes,3 noes and 0 absent. 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:Z-6822 Owner:Henry Kessler Applicant:Henry Kessler Location:3611 John Barrow Road Request:Rezone from R-3 to C-3 Purpose:Construct parking lot for adjacent liquor store Size:.13+acres Existing Use:Single family residence (to be relocated) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —Liquor Store;zoned C-3 South —Single Family;zoned R-3 East —Vacant lot,zoned R-3 West —Vacant lot;zoned C-3 and Single Family; zoned R-3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS 1.John Barrow Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline is required. With Bui ldin Permit 2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of -way prior to occupancy. 3.Property f rontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards. 4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT A CATA bus route is located on West 36 Street,just north of the site. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z —6822 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet and the John Barrow and Campus Place Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning request. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is located in the Boyle Park Planning District. The adopted Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial (MOC) for the tract.The house on Lot 10 actually straddles the line onto Lot 9 which is zoned C-3.The proposal is to develop this lot as parking to serve the adjacent commercial use.Allowing the expansion of the adjacent use rather than introducing a separate,new use seems reasonable to staff and appears to meet the spirit of the Plan.Development of the site,including screening and buffering,must be sensitive to the residential property adjacent to the south. The adopted Plan does also recommend MOC for the several properties adjacent to the south. The Land Use Plan is reflective of the John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan which was adopted on June 18,1996. Initial contact with the neighborhood association has shown the association to be supportive of this request.No plan change is necessary. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this lot f rom R-3 Single Family to C-3 General Commercial.This lot and half of the lot adjacent to the north are occupied by one single family residence.The lot to the north is already zoned C-3.The applicant proposes to relocate the house and develop the property as expanded parking for the liquor store which is located on the lots to the north. The property is located within the commercial node established at the intersection of West 36 Street and John Barrow Road.As was previously mentioned,the C —3 zoned properties to the north are occupied by a liquor store.A new auto parts store is under construction on the C-3 zoned block further north,across West 36 Street.A vacant,R-3 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6822 zoned lot is adjacent to the east.A vacant C-3 zoned tract and an R-3 zoned Single Family residence are located across Barrow Road to the west.A single family home is located on the R —3 zoned property to the south. This small,48 foot wide lot is not proposed for development as a free-standing use but is to be developed as additional parking to serve the existing business adjacent to the north.Expansion of the C-3 zoning onto this lot is an appropriate use which is compatible with uses and zoning in the area. The adopted Land Use Plan establishes a commercial node at the intersection of 36 and John Barrow,with Mixed Commercial extending further north and south along Barrow. This property is within the MOC area,abutting the commercial.The proposal is to develop this one lot as an expansion of an existing business which is located on the adjacent commercial properties.Such a proposal meets thespiritofthePlan. Development of the site must be sensitive to the adjacentresidentialproperties,with appropriate screening andbuffers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION S taf f recommends approval of the reques ted C-3 zoning . PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present. A letter of support from the John Barrow Neighborhood Association had been received by staff and forwarded to the Commission.Staff presented the item and a recommendationofapproval.The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by avoteof11ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 3 JOHN BARROW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PO BOX 45952 LITTLE ROCK,ARKANSAS 72204 WORKING TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY March 22,2000 Mr.Dana Carney Planning Department 723 West Markham Little Rock,AR 72203 Mr.Carney: The John Barrow Neighborhood Association encourages partnerships with businesses and organizations in our neighborhood.Mr.Henry Kessler attended the John Barrow Neighborhood Association meeting on March 21",2000 and asked for support of a rezoning request for property at 3611 John Barrow Road, to change from R-3 Single Family to C-3 General Commercial and will come before planning on April 13,2000,at 4:00p.m. Mr.Kessler is also the owner of Express Liquor at 3601 John Barrow Road and works very closely with the neighborhood association .He did approach several board members prior to even filing this request or coming before the association in order to poll opinions.Mr.Kessler owns a vacant lot on Walker street and is wanting to move the residence at 3611 John Barrow to the Walker location.This will not only allow him additional space for his delivery vehicles and employee parking but also fill a vacant lot and provide affordable housing in our area. It is the decision of the John Barrow Neighborhood Association members present at the March meeting to support Mr.Kessler and his endeavor. If you have additional questions please contact me 918-1962 or 568-4721. erely, &en ~%o-8~ Norma Walker,President John Barrow Neighborhood Association NW/bc April 13,2 000 ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:Z —6840 Owner:Sidney,James,Bruce and Richard Brain Applicant:Randy Alberius,Central Arkansas Land Development,LLC Location:West of 1012 and 1014 Autumn Road Request:Rezone from R-2 to 0-3 Purpose:Future general office development Size:.876i acres Existing Use:Vacant rear portion of tract which fronts onto Kanis Road SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North —Multistory medical office building;zoned 0-3 South —Residential,zoned R-2 East —Office and residential structure (to be removed);zoned 0 —3 West —Plumbing company and contractor storage yard; zoned R-2 PUBL I C WORKS COMMENT S 1.At the time that applicant files plat for subdivision, there will be requirements of street improvements and right-of-way dedication on Kanis Road and Autumn Road frontages. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT A CATA bus route is located on Chenal Parkway,one block north of the site. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet and the Birchwood Neighborhood Association were notified of the rezoning request. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6840 LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is located in the I-430 Planning District.The adopted Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial (MOC)for this tract and adjacent properties extending south to Kanis Road.The 0-3 General office zoning request conforms to the Plan.The property is within an area not covered by a neighborhood action plan.No action plan is proposed for the near future. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .87+ acre tract from R-2 Single Family to 0-3 General Office District.The property is the undeveloped rear portion of a larger tract which extends south to Kanis Road.Once rezoned,the property is to be included in a new office development,the initial phase of which has been developed on the property adjacent to the east. The property is behind the 0-3 zoned properties at 1012-1014 Autumn Road.These two properties are also owned by the applicant.The applicant has developed a small office building on the lot at 1012 Autumn Road.The property at 1014 Autumn was only recently rezoned to 0-3.The applicant proposes to develop these three properties as a small office park. A multistory medical office building is located on the 0-3 zoned property adjacent to the north.A nonconforming plumbing company and contractor'storage yard is on the R —2 zoned property to the west.This .87+acre tract is the rear portion of the R —2 tract to the south which fronts onto Kanis Road.The remainder of this tract now contains a residence.There are several other office uses in the immediate vicinity.The 0-3 request is compatible with uses and zoning in the area. The I-430 District Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial for this tract and the adjacent properties extending south to Kanis Road.The 0-3 General Office request conforms to the Plan. It appears that by separating this .87+acre tract from the larger tract,an illegal subdivision occurred.The 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6840 applicant was advised of this violation and is prepared tofiletherequiredplatdocumentstoaddresstheissue. Development of the property cannot take place until the plat issue is resolved.Rezoning the property will not affect the plat issue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staf f recommends approval of the requested 0 —3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 3 April 13,2000 ITF,M NO.:5 NAMF,:Master Street I'lan Amendment L()CAT I()N:Master Street I'Ian Revision on the 36'Street C'orridor S()U RCF.:Public Works Staff In th»I'all of 1997,Pet»rs 2 Associates I:nginc»rs,Inc.was retain»d t(i provide professional traf lie»ngin»»ring,services associat»d with the study of tr;(flic op»r;itions;uid tr;(flic x oluntc projections in the 36"Street corridor in western I.ittl» Rock.'I'hc study process h;is ini olv»d the use of est»usia»traf lie volume d'it;i in thc 'ippraisal ot the existing «nd projected "lull development'r;ivel characteristics in th»area ol western I.ittl»Rocl generally bound by: ~C'oloncl Ciicnn Road on the s(couth. ~Kani»ro;id on the north, ~I hc pi'opos»d O(ltei',oop oii tile west aIld ~Sh;icl lctord Road on the»;(st. On I cbruary I,2000,Public W(irk»Department held public meeting.All adjacent property owners werc notified of proposed 36"'Street I uturc Alignment changes. Public Worl s St;iff and Peters and Associates Fngineers were present to answer questions.Thirty-sci en people attended meeting (sce attached list ot attendants). ~Findin s: '1 he study has found that certain changes to the C'ity'»Master Street Vian can and sho(lid be made.I he recommeilded «Ilailges ai'e generally soutll of Kaills Road arid west ot'owman Road.'I'hey should b»mad»to contorrn to th»alternate 36"Street, C'.apitol I.akes I',states,C'.ooper Orbit Road and Kirby road alignments as well as certain y»t unbuilt C:ollcctor streets.Th»sc changes to the master Street Plan will provide better assurance of an adequate street network,which rcspccts both development character and densities and topography limitations.'I'he recommcndcd changes include a major change in the alignment of 36"Street west of Hov man Road which has much greater potential of serving as a major east-west arterial route than the current Master Street Plan 36'"Street Parkway alignment and which recognizes the limitations of topography and established development. Plannin and Ikevelo ment Comments: The proposed realignnscnt of 36"Street and related collector modiltcations do not result in Land Use Plan anomalies.There ~on't be any 'intense area"left,that do not have access to a major roadway.'I'his is also true of the zoning pattern. There arc two nsajor subdivisions within the area of suggested ch,urges:Hrodi» Creel and Capitol l,al cs.'I'hc proposed changes appear to be consistent with the approved preliminary plat for C'.apitol I.al'cs.Hrodie C'reel would require some minor changes to thc approved collector system.The collector through Hrodi» C'reel is located in thc proposed arterial corridor.In order not to have volutne and speed problctns on this collector 'tral I tc calming'esign elements should bc included. Public Work Recommendations: The Departtnent of Public Worl.s recommends adoption of an ordinance for the amendmcnt of thc Master Street Plan ol thc 36o'treet Corridor study.Figure 8 of the study is attached as an exhibit to be included in the proposed ordinance depicting the recommended changes. The applicants stated that an attempt would be made to resolve all ot the outstanding issues and be ready Ior C'ommission action on I'ebruary 17,2000, AAer the discussion,the C',ommittec forwarded the application to the full Commission. Plunnin ~Commission Action: Planning,C'omtnission rcquestcd more inlormation for propose West 36"'treet re- aligntncnt Study.C'omtnission requested that thc application bc deferred to thc May 25,2000 agenda. Thc C'hairman placed th»item bclorc the comntission lor inclusion within thc Consent Agenda for deferral to the May 25,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.Thc motion passed by a ~otc ol I I tycs,0 n tys,and 0 absent. Apri 1 13,2000 ITEM NO.:6 NAME:Briarwood Area Nei hborhood Plan STAFF REPORT: In late December 1998,the Briarwood Neighborhood Association contacted the Planning &Development Department about developing a neighborhood plan.During the spring of 1999,Staff met with members of the Briarwood Neighborhood executive committee about the plan process,area and survey questions. The plan area was determined to be from University Avenue on the east to Grassy Flat Creek and from Markham Street on the north to I-630.The basic process for plan development was agreed upon and the executive committee reviewed surveys used for other neighborhood plan areas as a guide for their survey. Staff reviewed the existing conditions —land use,zoning, housing conditions,transportation,etc.A draft 'existing conditions'as developed and provided to the executive committee.Once the basic survey questions were developed, the survey was distributed to neighborhood residents and businesses.Staff compiled the results from the survey and distributed them to the executive committee. Based on the survey summary and existing condition information together with their knowledge of the area,the executive committee identified three basic topics or 'Goal'reastobediscussed.The three topic areas for the Plan were determined to be Infrastructure,Safety,and Land Use/Zoning.A chairperson was selected and the neighborhood plan committee was charged with development of the plan around the three topic areas. Persons who had indicated an interest in working on the plan were contacted.This group met during the fall of 1999 to develop the Plan for the Briarwood Neighborhood Area.The plan committee drafted four goals with action statements and returned them to the Neighborhood executive committee.The executive committee was asked to set a neighborhood wide April 13,2000 File No.:6 (Cont.) meeting to discuss and accept the Plan. Staff distributed the 'draft 'lan to the Plans Committee of the Little Rock Planning Commission and various city departments for comment.All comments were received by Friday,February 18 and forwarded on to the executive committee for consideration.The neighborhood meeting was scheduled for Saturday,February 26,2000.Approximately 60 people attended the neighborhood meeting on the Plan.Those present after discussion of the issues in the Plan,voted unanimously in support of the Plan. The City Department comments were placed into an appendix of this report.The completed draft has been distributed to the Planning Commission,and the neighborhood now requests passage of a resolution supporting the vision and goals presented in this Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) Walter Malone,Planning Staff reviewed the process used to develop the Plan. Dana Deree,past president of Briarwood Neighborhood Association,addressed the Commission.Mr.Deree explained the importance of a traffic signal at the Hughes and Markham intersection.He reviewed the school issue,CATA issue (impact on other streets)as well as the traffic safety issue all related to this intersection.The neighborhood believes this is a very important issue and is hopeful through the Plan that this intersection will be raised higher in the list of traffic signals by the City. Another important issue is the Briar Creek which runs through the neighborhood.Completion of the drainage project is needed.In addition to flooding,in its current condition,the creek is a breeding area for rats and snakes. This becomes a major health hazard in the neighborhood.By placing this project in the Plan,it is the neighborhoods hope that it will raise the status of the project on the City's list of needed work. There are other local street and drainage issues,but these two are the top neighborhood concerns. 2 April 13,2000 File No.:6 (Cont.) In response to Commissioner Nunnley,Mr.Deree stated that the neighborhood would like the same treatment already completed on the south end to be continued.This is to turn the channel into a concrete ditch with safety fences. In response to Commissioner Earnest,Mr.Deree stated the neighborhood has not decided to do a park.But the neighborhood would like to pursue recreational options for the grassy area along I —630 in the neighborhood. In response to Commissioner Berry,Mr.Deree stated the neighborhood understood that the City was not promising things in the Plan.But that this is the best way to communicate the neighborhood's needs to the City.In response to housing and affordable housing questions,Mr. Deree referred to the apartments and other rental in the neighborhood.The neighborhood just wishes to remain a stable area. Commissioner Berry provided information about local vs. area-wide needs and interests and how these interplay.The City should make sure the expectation of neighborhood includes the realization that there may be overriding city- wide needs in conflict with.This should be included in the resolution. Commissioner Earnest asked about the rental inspection data. Mr.Malone assure the Commission that their concerns about providing better information on the program would be forwarded to the Housing and Neighborhood Programs Department. Commissioner Hawn moved to pass the Briarwood Area Neighborhood Plan.By a vote of 11-0,the Commission approved the resolution. 3 RE SOLUT ION NO . A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK,ARKANSAS IN SUPPORT OF THE BRIARWOOD AREA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. WHEREAS,the Briarwood Neighborhood Association with otherarearesidentsformedaPlanningCommitteetodevelopa Neighborhood Plan;and WHEREAS,the residents and other "stakeholders"in the areaparticipatedintheplandevelopment;and WHEREAS,after several months of work by the Planning Committee,a set of goals,objectives were developed andpresentedtotheneighborhoodataPlanPreviewmeeting;and WHEREAS,this Plan (Goals,Objectives)provides a way forbothneighborhood-based group and others working in and aroundtheneighborhoodtoadvancethedesiresandmeettheneedsoftheresidents. NOW,THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK,ARKANSAS. SECTION 1.The Planning Commission of the City of Little Rock does support the vision and goals as expressed in theBriarwoodAreaNeighborhoodPlan. DATE:—/5 ~D ATTEST:AP ROVED: k~ C T CHAIRMAN April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:LUOO-01-01 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —River Mountain Planning District Location:14814 —14910 Cantrell Rd. geest:Single yamily and Transition to Commercial Source:C.J.Cropper PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Single Family and Transition 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 have.The applicant wishes to build a retail commercial development. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently zoned R —2 and is approximately 26.6+acres in size.A large wooded area zoned R-2 Single Family lies to the north with homes built on large lots.A grocery store is located in a PCD (Planned Commercial Development)zone located to the south of the area under review.Homes built on large wooded lots typify the R-2 Single Family zone to the southwest.A tract of land zoned C-3 General Commercial occupied by a picture frame shop lies to the southeast.The property to the east is split between C-3,developed as a strip shopping center along Cantrell Road,and property zoned R-2 consisting of homes built on large lots to the north.The land to the west zoned R —2 consists of homes built on large lots in a wooded area. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On April 20,1999 a change was made form Single Family and Low Density Residential to Park/Open Space,Multi-family, Office,and Commercial about a mile to the east of the properties under review. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-01-01 The properties listed in the application are shown as Single Family on the northern half and as Transition on the southern half.Parks /Open Space is shown on the northern boundary of the application area.The Parks /Open Space covers the floodway of Ison Creek that runs roughly parallel to Pinnacle Valley Road.Commercial and Transition is shown to the south on the opposite side of Cantrell Road. Directly to the east of the application area,the land along Cantrell Road is shown as Commercial,while the land adjacent to Ison Creek is shown as Transition.Directly to the west of the area under consideration,the land along Cantrell Road is shown as Transition,while the remainder is shown as Single Family. MASTER STREET PLAN: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan. Taylor Loop Road is shown on the plan as a Minor Arterial. The Master Street Plan does not indicate any proposed changes for these streets. PARKS: River Mountain Park is located about a mile east of the property in question and is not accessed by Cantrell Road. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The property in question is located in an area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan.One important action statement included under the Sustainable Natural Environment goal is a statement supporting the preservation of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District.The neighborhood action plan also recommends the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Cantrell Road and Taylor Loop Road as well as the reconstruction of Taylor Loop Road as a 4-lane Minor Arterial from Hinson Road north to Cantrell Road. ANAL YS I S: The site under review is located near an existing commercial node at the Cantrell Road /Taylor Loop Road intersection. The surrounding area is characterized by both new residential subdivisions and homes built on large lots. 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-01-01 The area under review is located in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District adopted in 1989.The purpose of the district is to preserve the scenic attributes of the Highway 10 corridor through more restrictive development standards than applied to rest of the city.The Design Overlay District has enhanced the design standards of buildings along the corridor and covers 300 feet on each side of the Highway 10 right-of-way.Some site design and development standards of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District include a minimum lots size of two acres,a 100 foot setback from the property line abutting Highway 10,a rear setback of 40 feet,and a side setback of 30 feet.The Highway 10 design Overlay District also has additional landscaping,signage, curb cut,lighting,and maximum density of buildings allowed in commercial developments.Commercial developments are required to apply as one entire tract instead of individual lots and must be reviewed by the city through a site plan review process. Currently,the Land Use Plan shows 35+acres of Commercial in the Vicinity of the Cantrell Road /Taylor Loop Road intersection.The Commercial land use to the east (5.7 + acres),southeast (.7 +acres)and south (6.9 +acres)of the applicant'site are built-out and occupied by businesses.The shopping center anchored by the Kroger super market to the east fills over half of the 13 +acres of Commercial land use area proposed in that location.The 7.9 +acres of Commercial land use area south of the Kroger is occupied by businesses,leaving little room available for further expansion of commercial uses in the immediate vicinity of the applicant'site. Currently the Cantrell Road /Taylor Loop Road intersection is the site of a secondary commercial node.Two primary commercial nodes already exist along Cantrell Road with vacant property available for commercial uses.Such vacant property is located at the intersections of:Cantrell Road / Chenonceau Blvd,and Cantrell Road /Chenal Parkway. Approval of this amendment will result in the development of a third primary commercial node. If the amendment is approved,a strip of Park/Open Space is recommended along the eastern boundary of the Single Family located to the west.Such a Park/Open Space strip will 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-01-01 buffer the Single Family uses located to the west from the proposed Commercial uses. Approval of this amendment as applied for,coupled with an extension of Taylor Loop Road,could encourage requests for Land Use Plan amendments to change existing land uses along Pinnacle Valley Road and Cantrell Road to Commercial land uses.This could change the focus form Cantrell Road and shift commercial uses along Pinnacle Valley Road. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Pankey Community Improvement Association, Piedmont N.A.,Pleasant Forest N.A.,Pleasant Valley P.O.A., Secluded Hills P.O.A.,Walton Heights-Candlewood N.A., Westbury N.A.,and Westchester/Heatherbrae P.O.A.Staff has received 44 comments from area residents.Two are in support,39 are opposed to the change and three were neutral.Westbury and Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Associations,are opposed to the change. STAFF RECOMMENDAT I ONS: On March 27,2000,the applicant asked for deferral of the item to the June 22,2000 hearing date "so that this application can be considered at the same time as our PCD application for the same property."Based on standard Planning Commission procedures,this item is placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 22,2000 hearing date. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 22,2000 meeting to coincide with a Planned Development application.A motion was made to accept the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Otter Creek Planning District Location:Various Locations R~e est:Various requests per Otter Creek /Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action Plan Source:Otter Creek /Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action Plan PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Otter Creek Planning District from Commercial,Mixed Commercial and Industrial,Single Family,Industrial,and Multi-family to Single Family, Public Institutional,Commercial,Mixed Office and Commercial,Suburban Office,Service Trades District, Parks/Open Space,and Mixed Use.The Single Family category provides for single family homes at densities not to exceed 6 dwelling units per acre.Such residential developments are typically characterized by conventional single family homes,but may also include patio or garden and cluster homes,provided the density remain less than 6 units peracre. The Public Institutional category includes all 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. 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 have. The Mixed Office and Commercial category provides for a mixture of office and commercial uses to occur.Acceptable uses are office or mixed office and commercial.A Planned Zoning District is required if the use is mixed office and commercial.The Suburban Office category shall provide for April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 low intensity development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower density residential areas to assure compatibility.A Planned Zoning District is required. The Service Trades District category provides for a selection of office,warehousing,and industrial park activities that primarily serve other office service or industrial businesses.The district is intended to allow support services to these businesses and to provide for uses with an office component.A Planned Zoning District is required for development not wholly office. The Parks/Open Space category includes all public parks, recreation facilities,greenbelts,flood plains,and other designated open space and recreational lands. 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: The zoning along Stagecoach Road,from I-430 to Crystal Valley Road,consists of C-3 (General Commercial),C-4 (Open Display Commercial)and R-2 (Single Family)on the north side has small businesses located in commercial buildings and former homes with R —2 single Family to it'north.C-2 (Shopping Center),C-3 and R —2 lie along the south side of the road where single family homes,can be found with R-2 to the south of it covering the Fourche Creek area.This area is located in Sections 1-5 on the sketch map. The zoning along Stagecoach Road,from Crystal Valley Road to Baseline Road,consists of C —2,C —3,and R-2 on the northwest side and has small businesses located in commercial buildings and former homes,as well as single family residences.The area covered by the Crystal Valley Property Owners Association is zoned R-2.C-2,C-3,I-2 (Light Industrial),and OS (Open Space)zones lie on the southeast side of the road and are occupied by storage buildings and a welding shop for a telecommunications company.This area is located in Sections 6,7 and 8 on the sketch map. 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 The zoning along Stagecoach Road,from Baseline Road to Otter Creek Road,consists of C-l,C-2,C-3,R-2,and MF-12 (Multifamily)on the west side and has small buildings, single family homes,golf driving range,and a small shopping center.Large tracts of land occupied by single family homes lie to the west of Stagecoach Road.C-3,0-1 (Quiet Office),R-2,and MF-18 (Multifamily)lie on the east side of the road and have single family homes,churches,and a Southwestern Bell facility along the road with large vacant tracts of land to the east.Section 12 on the sketch map shows this area. The zoning along Stagecoach Road,from Otter Creek Road to County Line Road,consists of C-2,C-3,R-2,MF-18,and I-2 zones on the north side of the road occupied by commercial buildings,single family homes,apartments,and the Otter Creek City Park.The south side of the road consists of C- 3,C-4,I-2,OS,R-2,and R-7 (Mobile Home)zoning occupied by commercial buildings,single family homes,and a mobile home park.Sections 16-18 on the sketch map show this area. The zoning along I-430,from Baseline Road to I-30,consists of C-3,C-4,and R-2 zones occupied by single-family homes and large tracts of vacant land.The east side of the freeway consist of vacant tracts of land zoned I-2 (Light Industrial)and R —2.Sections 9,11,and 11—A on the sketch map cover this area. The zoning along Otter Creek Road,from I-30 to Stagecoach Road,consists of C-3,C-4,OS,and R-2 zoning and has vacant properties located in the Fourche Creek floodway on both sides of the road.The land to the north is vacant while a church occupies a large tract of land to the south near I-30.Sections 13,14 and 15 show this area on the sketch map. The zoning along Quail Run Drive from Otter Creek Parkway to Fawn Tree Drive consists of R-2 and MF-12 zoning occupied by single-family homes and churches.Section 19 is included in this area. The property included in this amendment is approximately 272.3 acres in size. 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On October 5,1999,a change was made from Single Family to Light Industrial at 12805 I —30 south of I-30 next to the Railroad track. On August 17,1999,a change was made from Multi Family to Mixed Use and Single Family along Stagecoach Road. On June 15,1999,a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office and Service Trades District at the northwest corner of Baseline Road and the Mabelvale Pike /I-30 interchange. On October 6,1998,a change was made from Community Shopping to Commercial at the northwest corner of I-430 and I-30 (Otter Creek Mall site). On May 19,1998,a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office on Crystal Valley Road north of Stagecoach Rd. On November 4,1997,numerous changes took place near I-30 and I-430 within a mile of the Otter Creek /Crystal Valley study area as a result of the Chicot West /I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan. On August 5,1997,a change was made from Multi-Family to Single Family south of Baseline Rd.east of Wimbledon Loop. On July 1,1997,a change was made from Community Shopping to Commercial at 12029 I-30 north to Otter Creek Rd. On July 1,1997,a change was made from Single Family to Parks/Open Space,Neighborhood Commercial to Mobile Home, and Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Mobile Home Park along Stagecoach Rd. The land use plan along Stagecoach Road,from I-430 to Crystal Valley Road,consists of Commercial on the north side with Single Family to it'north and Mixed Commercial Industrial along the south side of the road with Park/Open Space to the south of it.This area is located in Sections 1-5 on the sketch map. The land use plan along Stagecoach Road,from Crystal Valley Road to Baseline Road,consists of Commercial,Single Family and Park/Open Space along the north and west side with a large area of Single Family split by a strip of Park/Open Space to the northwest.The south and east side of the road is Mixed Commercial and Industrial,Park/Open Space,and 4 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 Industrial with Park/Open Space to the southeast of it. This area is located in Sections 6,7 and 8 on the sketch map. The land use plan along Stagecoach Road,from Baseline Road to Otter Creek Road,consists of Commercial,Mixed Use, Single Family,Park/Open Space,Neighborhood Commercial,and Community Shopping along the west side with Single Family, Park/Open Space,Multi-Family,and Public Institutional to the west.The east side of the road is Commercial,Office, Public Institutional,Park/Open Space,Neighborhood Commercial,and Community Shopping with Park/Open Space to the east.Section 12 on the sketch map shows this area. The land use plan along Stagecoach Road,from Otter Creek Road to County Line Road,consists of Community Shopping, Multi-Family,Park/Open Space,Light Industrial,and Neighborhood Commercial along the north side with Park/Open Space and Light Industrial to the north.The south side of the road is shown as Community Shopping,Mixed Commercial and Industrial,Park/Open Space,Mobile Home Park,and Neighborhood Commercial with Park/Open Space,Mixed Commercial and Industrial,and Commercial to the south. Sections 16-18 on the sketch map show this area. The land use plan along I-430,from Baseline Road to I-30, consists of Single Family and Commercial along the west side of the freeway with Park/Open Space to the west.The east side of the freeway is shown as Service Trades District and Mixed Office Commercial.Sections 9,11,and 11-A on the sketch map cover this area. The land use plan along Otter Creek Road,from I-30 to Stagecoach Road,consists of Commercial,Park/Open Space, Single Family,and Community Shopping with Park/Open Space and Commercial to the north.The south side of the road is shown as Commercial,Park/Open Space,Single Family,and Community Shopping with Commercial,Park/Open Space,and Public Institutional to the south.Sections 13,14 and 15 show this area on the sketch map. The land use plan along Quail Run Drive,from Otter Creek Parkway to Fawn Tree Drive,consists of Public Institutional and Single Family on the north side and Multi-Family and Single Family along the south side.Section 19 is included in this area. 5 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 MASTER STREET PLAN: I-430 is shown on the Master Street Plan as a freeway. Stagecoach Road is shown as a Principal Arterial from I-430 to Baseline Road and as a Minor Arterial from Baseline Road to County Line Road.A Class II bikeway is designated to follow Stagecoach Road from Brodie Creek to County Line Road.Baseline Road is shown as a Principal Arterial.Otter Creek Road is shown as a Minor Arterial from I-430 and ending at Stagecoach Road.Quail Run Drive is shown as a local street on the Master Street Plan. PARKS: Otter Creek City Park is located on Stagecoach Road near the county line. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The Otter Creek /Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action Plan contains a two goals relevant to these requested changes. The first goal concerns the residential development goal of promoting a community structure and designs,which promotes and maintains the rural and residential nature of the area and preserve the quality of life sought by residents.The second goal includes promotion of commercial and office development that meets the needs of area residents for shopping and services,maintains as much of the existing topography,trees,and green space as possible,and enhances the primarily residential character to the community. Action statements to help attain the residential development goal includes requesting changes to the Future Land Use Plan to land use designations appropriate for the area to protect existing residential property values and limiting multifamily development to the existing 40 acres of multifamily.The action statements to foster the office and commercial development goal include implementing policies that encourage the us of Planned Zoning Districts for new businesses locating on Stagecoach Road and placing large intense uses on the edge of the neighborhood away from Stagecoach Road. 6 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 ANALYS I S: The area under review is a neighborhood with new residential developments under construction and businesses expanding along Stagecoach Road.Traffic along Stagecoach Road is expected to increase.Population density is also expected to increase with the build-out of single family subdivisions and multi —family developments.The number of businesses in the area is expected to increase with the completion of highway improvements and the build —out of residential areas. The requested changes fall into three following groups. The following changes recognize the Fourche Creek floodway: Area .11a,Single Family to Park/Open Space;Area 13,Single Family to Park/Open Space;Area 15,Single Family to Park/Open Space;and Area 18,Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Park/Open Space. The next group is a list if changes recognizing existing zoning:Area 3,Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Commercial;Area 6,Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Commercial;8,Industrial to Commercial;Area 17,Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Service Trades District. The third list of changes recognize existing land uses:Area 1,Commercial to Single Family;Area 2,Commercial to Public Institutional;Area 5,Commercial to Public Institutional; Area 19,Multi —Family to Public Institutional;Area 14, Single Family to Public Institutional. The fourth group is proposed to decrease the intensity of the land use:Area 4,Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Mixed Office and Commercial;Area 9,Single Family to Service Trades District;Area 10,Single Family to Service Trades District;Area 11,Single Family to Commercial;Area 16,Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Mixed Office and Commercial. The last two are to encourage development along Stagecoach Road in a manner that is in keeping with the Goals and Objectives for development along Stagecoach Road:Area 7, Single Family to Suburban Office;Area 12,Single Family to Mixed Use. 7 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 The requested amendments also reflect the goals and objectives contained in the plan for residential, commercial,and office developments.The changes affecting residential uses are intended to insure a verity of housing types in the area while encouraging the build-out of developments already under construction.The amendments also encourage the concentration of business and commercial activity along Stagecoach Road in a way that supports the use of Planned Zoning Districts in making decisions about zone changes inside the neighborhood.The amendments also advocate the construction of intense commercial developments near the edge of the neighborhood along I-430 away from residential subdivision west of Stagecoach Road. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Meyer Lane N.A.,Otter Creek Homeowners Association,Quail Run N.A.,Rolling Pines N.A.,and Crystal Valley P.O.A.Staff has received no comments from area residents other than property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the changes are appropriate.Approval of these changes will encourage a mix of residential uses in the area,concentrate commercial developments along Stagecoach Road,encourage the more intense uses to locate along the I-430 /I-30 corridor,and preserve the natural environment of the floodway along Fourche Creek. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the commission.Two areas of proposed change were requested to be dropped from the amendment due to not gaining consensus from the property owners.These properties are located at 11500 Stagecoach Road,a proposed change from Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Service Trades District (referred to as area 17 on maps),and at 11701 Stagecoach Road,a proposed change from Mixed Commercial and Industrial to Park/Open Space (referred to as area 18 on maps).The remaining areas are to remain in the amendment. 8 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-16-05 This revised item was placed on the consent agenda for approval.A motion was made to approve item 8 as amended and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 9 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:LUOO-19-01 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Chenal Planning District Location:1801 Champlin Dr. Rectuest:Office to Commercial Source:Jack McCray,Del tie Timber Corporation PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District from Office 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 have.The applicant wishes to build a mini-storage warehouse. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The applicant'vacant property is currently zoned 0-3 General Office and is approximately 4.4 +acres in size. The property is bounded by a vacant lot zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial to the north,a vacant tract R —2 Single Family Residential to the south,the Carrington Park Apartments occupy a MF-18 Multi-family zone to the east, while the 0-2 Office and Institutional zone to the west remains vacant.A vacant lot zoned Planned Commercial Development lying to the northeast of the applicant's property is the site of a future Texaco convenience store. A shopping center is located further to the west on the Rahling Road /Chenal Parkway intersection in a Planned Commercial Development zone. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On January 4,2000 a change was made from Office to Commercial about a mile south of the applicant's property. On April 20,1999 a similar change was made on another piece of property from Office to Commercial about a mile south of the applicant's property. April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO —19-01 On December 15,1998 a change was made from Single Family to Public Institutional about 8 of a mile southeast of the applicant'property. On September 1,1998 a change was made from Single Family to Multifamily and from Multifamily to Single Family about 1,000 feet northwest of the applicant'property. On May 6,1997 various changes were made from Single Family, Public Institutional,Neighborhood Commercial and Park/Open Space to Single Family,Low Density Residential,Public Institutional,Office,Neighborhood Commercial,and Community Shopping.The changes resulted in the current designation of the applicant's property as Office on the Land Use Plan. The applicant's property is bounded on two sides by Office to the north and west.Multi-family land uses lie to the east and south of the applicant's property. MASTER STREET PLAN: Champlin Drive is shown on the Master Street Plan as a proposed Minor Arterial.Rahling Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Minor Arterial and is a segment of the proposed West Loop. PARKS: The Park System Master Plan does not show any parks in the vicinity of this proposed change that will be affected. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: This property lies just outside the boundary of the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan on the northwest corner.Nevertheless,the neighborhood action plan has a Traffic and Transportation goal containing an action statement that recommended the completion of Champlin Drive. ANALYS I S: The applicant'property is located in a neighborhood commercial node characterized by undeveloped land centered on the Rahling Road /Champlin Drive intersection.The existing PZD and the C-1 zoning should provide for 2 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-19-01 neighborhood services and goods.The Office future land use along Champlin Drive is acting as a buffer surrounding the developing commercial node and residential areas.Expanding commercial uses south and east along Champlin Drive will erode the buffer between residential areas.In addition, the commercial node at the Chenal Parkway /Rahling Road still has vacant land shown as Commercial available for development.The Chenal Parkway /Kanis Road intersection has vacant land available in an area shown as Mixed Office Commercial on the Future Land Use Plan. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations Aberdeen Court P.O.A.,Bayonne Place P.O.A.,Carriage Creek P.O.A.,Eagle Pointe P.O.A.,Glen Eagles P.O.A.,Hillsborough P.O.A.,Hunters Cove P.O.A.,Hunters Green P.O.A.,Johnson Ranch N.A.,Marlowe Manor P.O.A.,and St Charles P.O.A.Staff has received no comments from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate.Approval of this amendment will result in the erosion of the Office buffer around the commercial node at a time when undeveloped land shown as Commercial on the Future Land Use Plan exists within surrounding commercial nodes. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the May 11,2000 meeting to coincide with a Planned Development application.A motion was made to accept the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 3 April 13,2000 ITEM NO.:10 OTHER MATTERS SUBJECT:1999-2000 Annual Zoning Ordinance Amendments REQUEST:That the Planning Commission receive comment from interested parties,report from the Plans Committee,and setting the hearing date for advertised public hearing and adoption. HISTORY:In January of 1999 the Planning Commission staff began assembly of the list of issues to be included in this work program. Following the completion of the 1998 program in May of 1999,the Plans Committee began detail review of the thirty-three (33)subjects. During the course of the many work sessions the committee and staff agreed to delete eleven subject areas.These eleven involved litigation or a need to do a broader,more involved amendment review next cycle and in some instances there was no need to open the subject for discussion. The committee worked through four phases of amendment proposals,finishing its work on March 8th at which time staff was instructed to do the usual distribution of the ordinance draft to the mailing list.Additionally,the Commission meeting on April 13'as targeted as the first hearing by the full Commission. Attached to this agenda item is the last draft of a discussion outline that briefly identifies each change within the ordinance text. At this time it could be said that the staff and Plans Committee endorse the package as drafted.Commentary of contact persons will be included in this material as it develops. April 13,2000 File No.:10 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000) Richard Wood,of the Planning Staff,reported a late submittal of comments and suggested that a deferral is in order for this item.The Plans Committee will need to review the material before it returns to the Commission for a hearing. A motion was made to defer this item until May 25,2000. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 2 ~~~g 03/08/00 Draft 4 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 1999 PHASES I THROUGH IV Discussion Guideline Subsection a Deals with a prohibition to specifically disallow building over any easement by right. Subsection Provides for establishment of a 60%minimum retained natural, undisturbed area within land use buyers. Subsection c Establishes a definition of natural state to support language in the ordinance,on buyers. Subsection d This provides a by right listing of eating place so as to prohibit the 'eating in an automobile or drive through carry out;inside only. Subsection e This establishes a definition for eating place inside and ties to subsection (d). Subsection This provides for in C-1 the deletion of C.U.P.for "eating place, without drive-in service." Subsection This establishes a definition for adult day care not now provided within the ordinance. Subsection This provides for the new use,day care center adult,placement in the R-2,R-3,RX C.U.P.paragraph to permit that review process in the sante nianner as child day care. Subsection i This inserts adult day care in "0-1"as a use by right as is child care currently. Subsection 'his inserts adult day care in "0-2"as a use by right. Subsection This inserts adult day care in "0-3"as a use by right. Subsection 1 This inserts adult day care in "C-1"as a use by right. 'R.W.ORD.'99:Page 1 Subsection m This inserts adult day care in "C-2"as a use by right. Subsection n This inserts adult day care in "C-3"as a use by right. Subsection o This inserts adult day care in "I-1"as a use by right. Subsection This inserts adult day care in "I-2"as a use by right. Subsection This inserts adult day care in "I-3"as a conditional use. Subsection r This provides for a limit on the PD-0 and POD districts that sets a minimum of the development use at 51%oKce. Subsection s This provides for deletion of Board of Adjustment Authority relative to off-site parking,use and access.The Planning Commission would then hear these cases as land use change issues and perhaps rezoning. Subsection t This provides for cemeteries or mausoleums being conditional uses in all zoning classifications. Subsection u This provides for a specific time limit for staff holding a zoning matter awaiting a dedication deed for right-of-way. Subsection v This provides for establishing safeguards for public purchase of right- of-way and not creating nonconformity. Subsection w This provides the same safeguards as subsection (v). Subsection x This provides for deletion of one of the two listings for crematory,etc. in definitions. Subsection This provides for deletion of one of the two listings for mortuary or funeral home in definitions. Subsection z This inserts three new definitions as needed for the redraft of the fence regulations. Subsection aa This deletes all current language dealing with fences and inserts an entirely new text regulating placement of fences. Subsection b This inserts three new definitions dealing with a use not previously listed in the Ordinance. R.W.ORD.'99:Page 2 "0-"* K '0-"* K Subsection f This inserts taxi office in "C-3"zoning as a use by right. 0 ''0-d"* by right.Taxi office and taxi service facility. by right.Taxi office and taxi service facility.0««t«d«f long form planned zoning developments.No minimum lot size. section of the word "occupation".Sec.36-253(b)(6) Ordinance by adding clarification of wireless communication exception. use." "t'«"~*f«« library etc.It doesn't fit with the language.A new definition is necessary to separate the uses. d tt '«"f« Subsection oo This provides for placement within R-1 through R-6 of the use "fire station"as a conditional use. of the use "fire station"as a by right use. d" use listing and definition are not sales but lease or rent.The definition and district placement has "rental."It is only C-4 with the retail entry. R,W.ORD.'99:Page 3 I Subsection rr This provides for additional language to regulate placement of accessory buildings on double front lots,where there is potential for one lot to have a garage or other structure near the right-of-way line beyond the front setback for principal structures.The solution being to disallow accessory buildings closer than the principal building setback on either side. Ihi which is not now included specifically in the ordinance. Thi ''- definition "Bottled gas,sales and service." "Bottled gas,bulk storage,nonflammable or noiAazardous." R.W.ORD.'99:Page 4 a:99ordIn.doc PL A N N I N G CO M M I S S I O N VO T E RE C O R D DA T E t' ME M B E R 57 9s & 4 5 5 RE C T O R , BI L L DO W N I N G , RI C H A R D EA R N E S T , HU G H NU N N L E Y , OB R A Y BE R R Y , CR A I G AD C O C K , PA M RA H M A N , M! Z A N LO W R Y , BO B HA W N , HE R B FA U S T , JU D I T H MU S E , RO H N ~E Cv UL A R ME M B E R C D 2 RE C T O R , BI L L DO W N I N G , RI C H A R D V'A R N E S T , HU G H NU N N L E Y , OB R A Y BE R R Y , CR A I G v' AD C O C K , PA M RA H M A N , MI Z A N v LO W R Y , BO B HA W N , HE R B FA U S T , JU D I T H v MU S E , RO H N QC Me e t i n g Ad j o u r n e d 7' 3 Q P. M . AY E ~ NA Y E A AB S E N T ~A B S T A I N ~ RE C U S E t April 13,2000 There being no further business before the Commission,the meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. -(g -o J /J Secreta hai a