pc_06 30 1992subi
~ai4 VI
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
JUNE 30,1992
12:30 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum.
A Quorum was present being nine (9)in number.
1II.Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting.
The Minutes were approved as mailed by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays,2 absent and 1 abstention (Kathleen Oleson).
III.Presentation of the Consent Agenda
The Consent Agenda was approved by a vote 9 ayes,0 nays
and 2 absent.
IV.Members Present:John McDaniel,Chairman
Brad Walker
Jerilyn Nicholson
Joe Selz
Kathleen Oleson
Ronald Woods
Jim VonTungeln
Ramsay BallBillPutnam
Emmett Willis,Jr.
Members Absent:Diane Chachere
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
(
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
JUNE 30,1992
DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.Park Lane PRD (Z-5559)
B.Kidco Properties —Conditional Use Permit (Z-5383-B)
C.Butler —Conditional Use Permit —(Z-5558)
D.God's Home and Prayer —Conditional Use Permit (Z-5562)
PRELIMINARY PLATS:
1.Ada Lane Addition Preliminary Plat (S-949)
2.Pennwyck Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-947)
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS:
3.Dorcas House PRD (Z-3816-C)
4.River Heights PRD (Z-4987-B)
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION SITE PLANS:
5.Intercity Addition Subdivision Site Plan (S-948)
6.Systematics Zoning Site Plan (Z-2959-E)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:
7.National Home Center —Conditional Use Permit (Z-1428-A)
8.Pulaski Academy —Conditional Use Permit (Z-4246-B)
9.Western Hills Baptist Church —Conditional Use Permit (Z-5570)
10.Lusk's —Conditional Use Permit (Z-5573)
11.Second Genesis —Conditional Use Permit (Z-5574)
OTHER MATTERS:
2.12.6521 Lancaster from "0-3 to C-3"
13.Chenal Valley Land Use and Master Street Plan changes
14.Zion Street Right-of-Way Abandonment (G-23-172)
I
June 30,1992
ITEM NO 'FILE NO.:Z-5559
NAME:Park Lane PRD —Planned Residential District
LOCATION:NE corner of East 15th Street at Park Lane
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
YOUR HOME,INC.ROARK g PERK INS g PERRY
P.O.Box 341 713 West 2nd Street
Mabelvale,AR 72103 Little Rock,AR 72201-2287
455-0103 or 455-0919 501-372-0272
AREA:14,000 sq.ft.NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:MDR PROPOSED USES:Planned Residential District
PLANNING DISTRICT:8 NAME:Central City
CENSUS TRACT:4
VARIANCES RE VESTED:None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
The subject project is located at the northeast corner of East
15th Street and Park Lane.This is a proposal to construct to
buildings of wood frame on a site with twelve parking spaces,
two of which will be handicapped accessible.The two buildings
will be identical with mirrored image east to west elevations.
Each building contains four residential units,two are ground
floor units consisting of approximately 900 square feet each.
The upper level consists of two single bedroom apartments,
approximately 620 square feet each.All units are equipped
with full kitchen and bath.The units will be owned by
Your Home,Inc.and rented for private residential usage.
A.PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This application is a planned residential district as
permitted within the Central Little Rock zoning ordinance
area.The subject property of 14,000 square feet
accommodates the eight units at a density which is alittlemorethanduplexdensity.The project will place
upon this vacant weed lot,some residential housing which
will be valuable to the immediate area.Also,it will
potentially serve the new law school immediately north
across Interstate 630.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A Continued FILE NO.:Z-5559
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This tract of land is principally flat with a slight grade
to the east.The adjacent property to the north is the
Interstate 630 right-of-way,with pedestrian access to the
north and MacArthur Park.Lying to the south and west are
existing single family dwellings,many of which have been
recently renovated.Most of the property in the immediate
area is mix of medium density residential and low density
single family.
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Provide an additional 9 feet of right-of-way for the street
on the west side because the current right-of-way is
deficient.Provide curb and gutter and sidewalk on Park
Lane.Provide repair of curb and gutter and construct
sidewalk on East 15th Street.
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
The Planning staff's review of this proposal reveals the
following areas which will require attention.The plan
should be quantified as to the number of units,parking and
other space relationships.Elevations of the buildings
should be provided reflecting both texture and form.Thereisaneedforaspecificsitelandscapeplan,although,the
existing layout offers sufficient area for placement.
Identify all structural elements such as stairs and columns
not now noted on the plan.Show treatment of open land area
outside landscaping and hard surfacing such as lawn.
E.ANALYSIS:
The Planning staff's view of this proposal is that the
design,site and use are entirely appropriate.This
location lends itself well to a medium density type of
residential development given the character of the land
area to the east and north,which is principally the
rights-of-way of interstate highways.This proposal has
been and continues to be under review by the Historic
District Commission and staff.At this time,there does not
appear to be a problem with the architecture since the firm
designing the structure has placed an emphasis on
compatibility with existing residential buildings in the
area.Molly Satterfield for our staff will offer comments
later.However,the Historic District Commission will not
view this plan until after the Planning Commission.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A Continued FILE NO.:Z-5559
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of this planned residentialdistrictsubjecttoresolutionoftheseveralitems noted
above.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 30,1992)
The applicants and architect were in attendance.The Committee
discussed this proposal with the architect at length.It was
determined that many of the issues raised by staff have been
resolved or were being worked upon.The only issue of
significance was the additional right-of-way identified by Public
Works in order to provide the minimum street width for Park Lane.
The Committee and staff as well as the Public Works'erson
present felt that the dead end street,probably would not need
the additional right-of-way.The improvements,however,were
pointed out as needed.The architect was instructed if he
desired to pursue the waiver of the 9 foot right-of-way
dedication.The item would need to be forwarded to the Board of
Directors along with the PRD application,and he should make such
a formal request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 19,1992)
The staff reported to the Commission that staff discussions with
the architect and the Historic District Commission representative
requires a deferral of this item until June 30.The Planning
Commission placed the matter on the Consent Agenda for deferral.
The deferral was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and
1 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11,1992)
The applicant was not in attendance.Planning staff presented
the Historic District's comments as reported by MollySatterfield.The several items specifically required as a
modification of the plan are:
1.The driveway serving the parking lot off East 15th Street
should be provided a 22 foot driveway dimension from the
back of one curve to other.
2.The south edge of the proposed parking area should be
heavily screened to a width and height sufficient to screen
the parking and vehicle area from the area to the south.
3
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A Continued FILE NO.:Z-5559
3.The parking lot should be shifted to the north in such afashionastoprovidethecurblineoftheparkinglot
along the north property line.
4.As a result of the movement of the parking,a variance fromtheCityBeautifulCommissionwillberequiredtomodifythelandscaperequirement.
5.The south line of the parking lot should be at least 20 feet
from the south property line.
Additional items reported to the Committee by staff which requireresolutionareasfollows:
1.The 9 feet of right-of-way required for Park Lane.
2 .Curb,gutter and sidewalk on Park Lane
3.Repair curb,gutter and sidewalk on East 15th Street.
4.Provide detail landscape plan for the entire site,
giving height,type and spacing of
materials'.
Modify site plan to include all of the amendments
suggested by the Historic District Commission.
After a brief discussion of the several items noted above,the
Committee passed this matter to the full Commission for a finalresolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30 g 1992 )
The staff offered an update on this application since the item
was deferred from a previous Planning Commission meeting for
purposes of presenting the item to the Historic District
Commission.The report of this commission has been received,andtherewereseveraldesignitemspresentedtotheSubdivision
Committee for review.The staff and Subdivision Committee found
no fault with the several recommendations.It was felt thatthesechangeswouldonlyenhancethequalityoftheenvironmentofthisproject.
Mr.Scott Evans,representing the architectural firm for thisproject,made a brief presentation and updated the Commission onthesiteplan.Mr.Evans pointed out the several changes andofferednofurthercommentontheseveralvariancesfrom
ordinance standards.A brief discussion followed and there were
no objectors in attendance.A motion was made to recommend to
4
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A Continued FILE NO '-5559
the City Board the approval of this planned residential districtasrevised,including comments of the Historic District
Commission.A vote on the motion was 9 ayes,0 nays and
2 absent.
ADDENDUM
Planning staff discussed with the applicant after the meetingtheirintenttopursuethetwovariancesrequestedatSubdivision
Committee level.Mr.Scott Evans of the architectural firmindicatedthattheydesiredtocontinuetheirvariancerequestforthe9footstreetdedicationonParkLaneandthesidewalk
improvements.
5
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:B
NAME:Kidco —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-5383-B)
LOCATION:5510 Kavanaugh
OWNER APPLICANT:Walter Quinn
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for dry cleaning plantfacility.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS
1.Site Location
This site is located a half block west of the intersectionofPolkandKavanaugh.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The site is surrounded by commercial and office uses.Theproposedusewillnotbecompatiblewiththesurroundingneighborhood.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
The applicant is proposing a circular drive that willingressandegressoffofKavanaugh.A request for avariancefromtheparkingrequirementwillbeneeded.Atotalnumberofninespacesarerequired,however,theapplicantwillbeabletoonlyprovidefourspaces.
4.Screenin and Buffers
The applicant plans to utilize all of the existing screening
and buffers.If additional landscaping is needed,theapplicanthasagreedtoprovideit.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
Collector right-of-way dedication and Master Street Plan
improvements are required on Kavanaugh Boulevard.
6.A~nal sis
Kidco Properties,Inc.is applying for a Conditional UsePermitforLots1and2,Block 22,Newton's Addition.TheapplicanthasenteredintoaleaseagreementwithTownandCountry,Inc.,d/b/a The Heights Cleaners,for the
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B Continued
construction of a new facility.The total building size tobeconstructedisonethousandsevenhundred(1,700)squarefeet.The operators of the dry cleaning business have
computed the operating information as outlined below:
1.Hours of operation are 7:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.
2.Total number of employees working at one timeisfive(5).
3.Estimated total number of customers whenbusinessoperatesatfullcapacityisninety(90)patrons per day.
4.Based on the total number of customers per day,eighteen (18)will utilize the delivery service,forty-seven (47)will utilize the drive thru
window,and the remaining thirty-five (35)will.
Staff feels that this request is an overbuilding of the lot.The building size prevents the applicant from providing thenecessaryrequiredparkingspaces.The applicant also willnotbeabletomeetthelandscapingrequirements.If thelandscapingrequirementsaremet,then the circular drivewillberenderedunfunctionable.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit asfiled.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 30,1992)
The applicant was in attendance.Staff gave an overview of therequestandstaff's recommendation.The applicant decided hewouldsubmitarevisedplantoaddressstaff's concerns.ThisitemwasforwardedtothefullCommissionforaction.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 19,1992)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had not metthenoticerequirement.This item has to be deferred untiltheJune30,1992 meeting.As part of the Consent Agenda,thedeferralofthisitemwasapprovedbyavoteof10ayes,0 noesand1absent.
2
I
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 30,1992)
Walter Quinn represented the applicant.Mr.Quinn presented tothecommitteemembersandstaffanewsiteplan.The use will
be the same but the building was reduced.A variance for the
parking requirements will have to be granted by the Commission.Staff and the committee members felt that the new site plan is
probably the best way the property can be used.
The only problem discussed was for Mr.Quinn to present a scaledsiteplanofthepropertybyJune18,1992 at 12:00 noon to thestaff.
No additional discussion took place.This item was sent on tothefullCommissionforaction.
NEW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit per theengineeringrequirementsandgrantingoftheparkingvariance
being met.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The applicant,Walter Quinn,was in attendance.There was one
person present to speak against the Conditional Use Permit.
Mr.Quinn stated he had been working with staff on this propertyforaboutoneyear.As shown on the sketch,there will be a
building approximately 2,100 square foot building to house adry-cleaning plant with five parking spaces.The existingstructureisolderandinneedofalotofrepair.
Mr.Jim Frank addressed the Commission.He was representing
Ozark Outdoor Supply,which is located on the west side of thissite.Some of their concerns are as follows:
1.The character of the building should have a more detailed
plan of the site.
2.The Conditional Use Permit may be a stepping stone to anindustrialtypeuse.
3.There is already an existing traffic and parking problem.
4.The site plan being reviewed has a portion of the buildingisonthelotline.This particular side yard is being usedtodisplayboatsandotheroutdoorsupplies.
3
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B Continued
5.The dry-cleaning business has a tendency to catch fireaccidentallyorotherwise.
Mr.Quinn stated that he was willing to work with anyone in ordertogettheConditionalUsePermit.He had no problem centeringthehousemoretotheeast.The character of the building willfitwiththeexistingbuilding.
One commissioner stated that her concern was when the property
was rezoned the decision was for the property to be neighborhoodcommercial.
Mr.Quinn stated that when the property was rezoned a different
type of use was proposed.A commissioner then stated she did notfeelthatitwastheresponsibilitytoaccommodatetheneedoftheapplicant.
Staff was asked to explain why the building is on the lot line.Staff stated one reason is the fact that all of the yard area
would have had to be paved on the old site plan in order to
provide for a circular drive.
A considerable amount of discussion took place regarding the use
on the site,parking and landscaping as well as the design of thebuildingandtherequirementfortheparkingspaces.
A motion was then made to approve the Conditional Use Permitsubjecttothebuildingbeingmovedtwo(2)feet on the westsideofthepropertylineandgrantingaparkingvariancefor
two spaces.The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,2 noes,1 abstention (Walker)and 1 absent.
4
I I
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:C
NAME:Butler —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-5558)
LOCATION:12424 Heinke Road
OWNER APPLICANT:Peter Butler/Phillip Butler
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for an accessory dwelling.
(The site is zoned R-2.)
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS
1.Site Location
This site is located approximately 400 feet from theintersectionofMabelvaleCutoffandHeinkeRoad.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood.
Surrounding the site is residentially zoned property and
vacant property.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
The applicant plans to take access off of a 20 foot gravelroadwhichconnectswithan8footgraveldrive.
4.Screenin and Buffers
There is a considerable amount of vegetation on the site.Staff is unaware of any additional landscaping requirements.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
There are no engineering comments to report.
6.A~nal sis
As of this writing,staff has not received the required
information needed to complete the application.
7.Staff Recommendation
Due to the fact that the applicant has not complied with thefilingrequirements,staff recommends this item be deferreduntiltheJune30,1992 meeting.
1
I
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 30,1992)
The applicant was not in attendance,therefore,this item was notdiscussed.It was forwarded to the full Commission without anyadditionalcomments.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 19,1992)
Staff informed the Commission that the application for this item
was incomplete and needed to be deferred until the June 30,1992meeting.As part of the Consent Agenda,a deferral of this item
was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff informed the committee members of the applicant having made
no effort to complete the application process.Staff is
recommending withdrawal of this item,and the committee membersagreed.This item was sent on to the full Commission for action.
NEW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff recommends that this item be withdrawn without prejudice.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
As part of the Consent Agenda,this item was withdrawn per thestaffrecommendation.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
2
l
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:D
NAME:God's Home and Prayer Center
Conditional Use Permit (Z-5562)
LOCATION:3121 and 3123 Dr.Martin Luther
King,Jr.Drive
OWNER APPLICANT:Pearlie Lyles
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for a religious shelter.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.Site Location
This site is located at the northeast corner of West 32ndStreetandDr.Martin Luther King,Jr.Drive.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The use of this proposed property is not compatible with theexistingneighborhood.The proposed use will create an
undue hardship to the adjacent property owners.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
No on-site drives nor parking plan has been submitted to thestaffasofthiswriting.
4.Screenin and Buffers
The applicant has not submitted to staff any type ofscreeningandbuffersiteplans.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
The applicant will be required to improve the curb,gutterandsidewalksonWest32ndStreet.Also,required is torepairthecurbandsidewalksonMartinLutherKing,Jr.Drive.
6.A~nal sis
The applicant has not submitted the required information tostaffinorderfortheapplicationtobeproperlyprocessed.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that this item be deferred until theJune30,1992 meeting.The applicant has not met all theapplicationrequirements.
1
'f
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 30,1992)
The applicant was not in attendance.No detail discussion tookplaceaboutthisitem.This item was sent on to the full
Commission for action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 19,1992)
Staff informed the Commission that the application for this item
was incomplete and needed to be deferred until the June 30,1992
meeting.As part of the Consent Agenda,a deferral of this item
was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff informed the committee members that the applicant had made
no effort to complete the application process.Staff is
recommending withdrawal of this item,and the committee members
agreed.This item was sent on to the full Commission for action.
NEW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff recommends that this item be withdrawn without prejudice.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30/1992)
As part of the Consent Agenda,this item was withdrawn per thestaffrecommendation.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
2
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:C
NAME:Butler —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-5558)
LOCATION:12424 Heinke Road
OWNER APPLICANT:Peter Butler/Phillip Butler
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for an accessory dwelling.
(The site is zoned R-2.)
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.Site Location-—--——
This site is located approximately 400 feet from theintersectionofMabelvaleCutoffandHeinkeRoad.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood.
Surrounding the site is residentially zoned property andvacantproperty.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
'The applicant plans to take access off of a 20 foot gravelroadwhichconnectswithan8footgraveldrive.
4.Screenin and Buffers
There is a considerable amount of vegetation on the site.Staff is unaware of any additional landscaping requirements.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
There are no engineering comments to report.
6.~Anal sis
As of this writing,staff has not received the requiredinformationneededtocompletetheapplication.
7.Staff Recommendation
Due to the fact that the applicant has not complied with thefilingrequirements,staff recommends this item be deferreduntiltheJune30,1992 meeting.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 30,1992)
The applicant was not in attendance,therefore,this item was notdiscussed.It was forwarded to the full Commission without anyadditionalcomments.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 19,1992 )
Staff informed the Commission that the application for this item
was incomplete and needed to be deferred until the June 30,1992meeting.As part of the Consent Agenda,a deferral of this item
was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff informed the committee members of the applicant having made
no effort to complete the application process.Staff is
recommending withdrawal of this item,and the committee membersagreed.This item was sent on to the full Commission for action.
NEW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff recommends that this item be withdrawn without prejudice.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
As part of the Consent Agenda,this item was withdrawn per thestaffrecommendation.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
2
I
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:D
NAME:God's Home and Prayer CenterConditionalUsePermit(Z-5562)
LOCATION:3121 and 3123 Dr.Martin Luther
King,Jr.Drive
OWNER APPLICANT:Pearlie Lyles
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for a religious shelter.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1 ~Site Location
This site is located at the northeast corner of West 32ndStreetandDr.Martin Luther King,Jr.Drive.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The use of this proposed property is not compatible with theexistingneighborhood.The proposed use will create anunduehardshiptotheadjacentpropertyowners.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
No on-site drives nor parking plan has been submitted to thestaffasofthiswriting.
4.Screenin and Buffers
The applicant has not submitted to staff any type ofscreeningandbuffersiteplans.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
The applicant will be required to improve the curb,gutterandsidewalksonWest32ndStreet.Also,required is torepairthecurbandsidewalksonMartinLutherKing,Jr.Drive.
6.A~nal sis
The applicant has not submitted the required information tostaffinorderfortheapplicationtobeproperlyprocessed.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that this item be deferred until theJune30,1992 meeting.The applicant has not met all theapplicationrequirements.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 30,1992)
The applicant was not in attendance.No detail discussion tookplaceaboutthisitem.This item was sent on to the full
Commission for action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 19,1992)
Staff informed the Commission that the application for this item
was incomplete and needed to be deferred until the June 30,1992meeting.As part of the Consent&Agenda,a deferral of this item
was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Staff informed the committee members that the applicant had made
no effort to complete the application process.Staff is
recommending withdrawal of this item,and the committee membersagreed.This item was sent on to the full Commission for action.
NEW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:(JUNE 11,1992 )
Staff recommends that this item be withdrawn without prejudice.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
As part of the Consent Agenda,this item was withdrawn per thestaffrecommendation.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
2
I
Zune 30,1992
ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO '-949
NAME:Ada Lane Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Off Dreher Road NW 1/4 NW 1/4 NW 1/4,Section 14,T-l-S,R-12-W,Pulaski County,Arkansas (811 Ada Lane)
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER'ARKER-SQUIRES
ALLEN DEE WILSON811AdaLaneP.0.Box 604LittleRock,AR 72206 North Little Rock,AR 72114888-5766 758-8333
AREA:1.72 Ac.NUMBER OF LOTS:4 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:Outside Jurisdiction PROPOSED USES:Single Family
PLANNING DISTRICT:23 NAME:Arch Street
CENSUS TRACT:40.01
VARIANCES RE UESTED:
1.All boundary street improvements and sidewalk
2.Pipe stem lots
A.PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This applicant proposes the creation of four residentiallotsonasingleownershipnowoccupiedbyseveraldwellings.The primary purpose for this new platting is toprovideforaminimumfrontageonAdaLaneinordertoqualifyforseparatewaterserviceforeachofthelots.The pipe stems proposed will also provide for a overlaydriveeasementtoservetherearmostlots.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The lots at issue are currently occupied and used as singlefamilydwellings.The immediate neighborhood is developedsimilarandadjacentstreetsaredevelopedtocountyroadstandardswithoutbenefitofcurb,gutter and sidewalk.
The terrain of the several lots and the adjacent area isgenerallyflat.
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Street improvements on Ada Lane are required by theSubdivisionordinancetotheresidentialstandardof50feetofright.-of-way and 27 feet of pavement.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 Continued FILE NO.:S-949
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
The only issues associated with the creation of this platinvolvethewaiverrequestwhichwillrequireavariance byordinancefromtheCityBoardofDirectors.Additionally,
any pipe stem lots,as proposed,will require approval bytheCityBoard.The Bill of Assurance will be required toofferspecificlanguagetoprovidefortheoverlayofaccesseasementuponthetwopipestems.
E.ANALYSIS:
The staff's view of this proposal is that the plat isentirelyappropriatetothecurrentcircumstance.There are
no other options available to this property owner to solvetheexistingdevelopmentcircumstance.This area of Pulaski
County is developing slowly in large lots,in and about anareabeingdevelopedpartlyasmining.All of the streets
and highways observed by staff in this area revealed a totalabsenceofurbanstandardsfortheroadways.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat withseveralmodificationstothepreliminaryplattomeet thefilingstandards.We also recommend approval of the twovariancesrequested.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11,1992)
The owner was present,Mr.John Parker.Staff presented a briefoverviewandhistoryofthisitem.There was a brief discussionofthestructureofthelotsandtheseveralvariancesrequested.
The Committee accepted the filing as presented and forward thepreliminaryplattothefullCommissionwiththetwovariances asrequestedfordisposition.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
Staff presented its recommendation of approval of this
preliminary plat and the attendant variances for pipe stem lots
and boundary street improvements.Staff pointed out that the
neighborhood of this proposed plat is significantly removed fromthedevelopedurbanizedarea.There are little or no streetsconstructedtocompletecitystandardswithinseveral
miles'ariancesofthisnaturehavebeenextendedtoseveral plats intheimmediateareainrecentyears.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 Continued FILE NO.:S-949
After a brief discussion of the proposal,the motion was made to
approve the preliminary plat as filed with the requestedvariances.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and
1 absent.
3
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-947
NAME:Pennwyck Subdivision —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:SE Corner Montgomery Road at Taylor Loop Road
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER'.
A.PENNEY,JR./CO-OWNER DUANE I.REEL2311Vollmang3FoxfireCove
North Little Rock,AR 72118 Jacksonville,AR 72076758-8828 982-4332
AREA:5.1 Ac.NUMBER OF LOTS:22 FT.NEW STREET:700 ft.+
ZONING:R-2 PROPOSED USES:Single Family
PLANNING DISTRICT:19 NAME:Chenal
CENSUS TRACT:42.06
VARIANCES RE UESTED:
1.Sidewalks on both boundary streets
2.Lot depth on Lots 8,17,18,21 and 22 that less
than 100 feet
3.Lot 8 to have nonradial side lot lines.
4.Building lines on front and rear of Lots 18 and 21to20feet
A.PROPOSAL RE UEST:
This item proposes the creation of a number of single
family lots on an existing undeveloped site.Almost all ofthelotsareorientedawayfromTaylorLoopRoadwhichis
a collector.The developer proposes a staged development
with a plan to be submitted prior to the public hearing
on June 30.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The land involved in this plat is covered by natural growth,trees and underbrush.The site as well as the adjoiningpropertiesaregenerallyflatgrade.There are nosignificantdrainageproblemsinthearea.Boundary streetsareconstructedtocountyroadstandardswithopenditchsection.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 Continued FILE NO '-947
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Construct Master Street Plan improvements on Taylor Loop
Road to a collector standard and Montgomery Road to aresidentialstandard.Excavation and Detention Ordinanceswillapply.Montgomery Road is a residential street,
although the plat apparently identifies an existing 60 feetofright-of-way.The pavement section will be required at
27 feet.
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
There are no apparent legal issues attendant to the filingofthisplat.However,there are a number of plat designissueswhichshouldbeaddressed.These issues are:
1.Phasing Plan2.Lots 17,18,21,22 and 8 appear to be less than
minimum lot depth of 100 feet.
3.Robyn (street name)should be reviewed for possibleconflictwithotherplatsandstreets.
4.Lot 8 lot lines are not radial to the streetcenterline.A variance should be requested if the
circumstance is to remain.
5.PAGIS Monument sites should be noted on the plat.
6.Source of sewer and water should be reflected.
7.Indication on the plat of the construction dimensions
and right-of-way dedication,which may be required for
boundary streets.
E.ANALYSIS:
Staff review of this preliminary plat is that it is entirely
appropriate to the site and circumstances.Our review ofthepreliminaryplatreflectsthatitisofagooddesign
and should work quite well with the adjacent development andlots.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat as
submitted;however,we do not recommend approval of the
sidewalk waiver on the adjacent streets because this
subdivision is in an area that is developing and there arefullcitystreetimprovementsonpropertynearby.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 Continued FILE NO.:S-947
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11,1992)
The engineer was present representing Mr.Penny.Mr.Penny wasalsoinattendance.The staff offered the several items fordiscussion.The owner,Mr.Penny,as well as his engineerindicatedtheywouldtaketheappropriatestepstorevise the
plat to deal with the several problem areas pointed out by staff,
and to add the several items needed to complete the plat filing.
The Committee briefly discussed with the engineer the sidewalk
variance which is the one requested exception from standards.It
was pointed out that this will require a City Board of
Directors'rdinancetoextendsuchavariance.The project engineer thenidentifiedthelocationorsourceofsewerserviceforthissubdivision.He pointed out that a plat immediately north andeastalongTaylorLoopprovidedaconnectionforasewerline,
and that would be their point of contact.
He also provided information on a staff request concerning the
removal of a small hill or grade within the interior of the plat.
His comments were that the design of the plat requires loweringthissmallhillmasstomakethestreetgradeandthelotworkbetter.After a brief and general discussion,the Committee then
forwarded the plat to the full Commission for a final resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
Staff offered its recommendation of approval of this preliminaryplatsubjecttotheseveralminorplatmodificationspointedout
in our analysis.Staff also reported that the applicant has
added two variances to the request,one dealing with lot depth onfiveofthelotsandthethirdvariancedealingwithnonradial
side lot lines.Staff reported there was no problem with these
variances because they are minor and the minimum lot sizes areprotected.
Mr.Jim Butler was present and represented the applicant,
Mr.Penny was also in attendance.Mr.Butler offered some brief
comments on the plat.The Chairman then asked if there were
persons in attendance objecting to the proposal.There were
several objectors and there spokesperson was Mr.Larry Landis ~
Mr.Landis offered concerns about drainage from this propertyaffectingpropertiesacrossthestreet.Richard Wood of staff
reported to the Commission that this plat carries a
responsibility of conformance with the Detention Ordinance,therefore,no increase in runoff will be permitted in excess ofthatnownaturallygeneratedonthesite.The engineer on thisprojectwillberequiredtodesigndetentionfacilitiesintothe
drainage and street plans submitted to Public Works.
3
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 Continued FILE NO.:S-947
This information appeared to satisfy Mr.Landis and his neighborsastotheirconcerns.A brief discussion followed in which thesubjectofsidewalkswasraised.Several commissions offeredobjectiontoavarianceforsidewalksinthisarea.Staff
pointed out that this is an urbanizing area around Taylor Loop.
There have been several additional plats developed with full
standards nearby.Mr.Penny,the applicant,was asked by the
Chairman if he desired to pursue this sidewalk variance to the
City Board,and Mr.Penny indicated that he did not.
After a brief discussion,the motion was made to approve the
preliminary plat as modified and recommended approval of thethreevariancesrequestedforlotdepth,radial side lines,and
building lines.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays
and 1 absent.
4
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:Z-3816-C
NAME:Dorcas House —PRD Short-form
LOCATION:823 Park Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER ARCHITECT:
UNION RESCUE MISSION JAMES I.MORTON
BY BOB LANE 6104 Young Road
P.O.Box 164057 Little Rock,ARLittleRock,AR 72216
374-1748/660-6800
AREA:32,000 sq.ft.Ac.NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:N/A
ZONING:PRD PROPOSED USES:Shelter for family
PLANNING DISTRICT:8 NAME:Central City
CENSUS TRACT:10
VARIANCES RE UESTED:None
A.PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This application was filed for purposes of modifying a
previously approved PRD for the Dorcas House project.The
proposal,as now before the Planning Commission,consists of
a single structure having approximately 14,000 square feet
of floor space.The building will contain nine bedrooms.
The facility will be staffed to handle 50 to 60 women and
children with emergency population expansion to
approximately 90 persons.Once occupied the former Dorcas
House site will be sold or used for other purposes by the
organization.The building proposed for this site will
contain training rooms,kitchen facilities,diningfacilities,the administrative offices and other spaces.
The site layout reflects the structure being moved from the
previous location in a central part of the ownership to a
point adjacent to the north property line.
The parking area will consist of 27 parking spaces taking
access from both Park Street and West 9th Street.The
applicant reports that the project will now be located
totally upon property owned by the Union Rescue Mission
organization.They have recently acquired a portion of the
property which was owned and controlled by the State Highway
Department.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION P.U.D.
ITEM NO.:3 Continued FILE NO.:Z-3816-C
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This site lies in a low area adjacent to Interstate 630 at
the point where Park Street passes beneath the interstate
running to the north to the State Capitol grounds.The
adjacent neighborhood is developed primarily as single
family homes.There is a scattering of vacant property and
some usage to the east by the Arkansas Children's Hospital.
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Construct sidewalks on both 9th Street and Park Street.
Replace the open drainage now on the site,with a pipe.
Detention and Excavation Ordinances will apply.The
delivery entrance on the north end of the property should be
a minimum of 16 feet wide.
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:None
E.ANALYSIS:
The staff review of this application indicates to us that
there will be very little impact on the adjacent
neighborhoods.In fact,this project will be more
compatible with the neighborhood than the previous design
due to the movement of the structure to the north,and the
reduction of structural involvement.There is a small loss
in this project over the previous plan in that the old redbrickhouselocatedonthesitewillbedemolished.Thisstructurewasdeterminedtobeunsoundandtooexpensive for
renovation and utilization by the Dorcas House.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Planning staff recommends approval of this PCD,with the
several items requested by Public Works.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11,1992)
Mr.Bob Lane was present and represented the proposal.He
offered a brief overview of the project.Richard Wood of thestaffmadeseveralpointsincludedinourreviewoftheproposal.
There were no additional design or technical issues raised at the
meeting.The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commissionforafinalresolution.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION P.U.D.
ITEM NO.:3 Continued FILE NO.:Z-3816-C
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The staff presented its recommendation of approval and reportedthattherewerenocontinuingissues.Mr.Bob Lane was present
and represented the proposal.Mr.Lane offered no additional
comment on the proposal.The other question raised by the
Commission was a query as to whether the current red brick house
would be utilized in this project,and was not a part of the
previous approval.Staff reported that the previous plan did
include utilization of that building.However,it is now in adeterioratedstateandwillberemovedandnotutilizedinthe
present plan.
After a brief discussion,the Commission determined to place this
item on the Consent Agenda for approval as filed.The motion tothateffectwasmade.The motion was approved by a vote of
9 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
3
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:Z-4987-B
NAME:River Heights —PRD Short-form
LOCATION:NE Corner of Canal Pointe at Riverfront Drive
R~E VEST:To reclassify from "PCD"to "PRD"
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
R.G.I.REALTY GROUP,INC.WHITE-DATERS,
IN'.
BRADLEY WALKER 401 Victory Street
1500 Riverfront Drive Little Rock,AR 72201LittleRock,AR 72202 374-1666
666-4242
AREA:3.39 Ac.NUMBER OF LOTS:17 FT.NEW STREET:0 public street
ZONING:PCD PROPOSED USES:Single Family
PLANNING DISTRICT:4 NAME:Heights —Hillcrest
CENSUS TRACT:15
!
VARIANCES RE VESTED:None
A.PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This application is a continuation of the Canal Pointeproject,which lies immediately to the northeast.The projectisproposedforsinglefamilyhomesonsmalllots,a privatestreetsystemwithacontrolledaccess,shared open space andaccesstothecanalfacilityandthemarina.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The area on which this subdivision will be developed isclearedandpartoftheformergolfcoursearea.The landliesimmediatelyadjacenttoRiverfrontDrivenorthboundlanes.The access will be from the existing street lying onthesoutheasterlysideoftheprojectaffordingasafeentrytoandfromthedevelopment.There are no site physicalconstraintstothedesignofthisproject.
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Construct sidewalks along Riverfront Drive.
1
June 30,1992
PRD
ITEM NO.:4 Continued FILE NO :Z-4987-B
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
The plat as submitted requires some modification due toconfusionabouttheseverallinesastowhethertheyare
property lines,street pavement lines or some other easementline.The several items staff requires to be modified withintheplatsubmittalareasfollows:
1.Clarify the transition of property lines into street
pavement lines at several points on the plat.
2.On River Heights cul-de-sac,specify whether the curb and
easement line are one in the same or whether the lot linefallstothecenterofthestreet.
3.Place dimensions on Lot 17 to clarify buildingrelationship.
4.Indicate River Height Road as access,utility and
drainage easement.
5.Explain the curb alignment across the northwesterly
corner of the plat intruding upon one of the lots.
6.Submit a narrative on the typical home to be constructedastofloorspace,height and other physicalcharacteristics.
7.Indicate relationship of plat to 100 year floodplainelevation.
8.Resubmit plat including the new design with fewer lots,
and include the several items left off the plat atsubmittal.
E.ANALYSIS:
Staff review of this project is that it is entirely
appropriate to the location and character of the neighborhood.
The project proposal is a continuing effort of a qualityproject.There are no land use issues associated with the
proposal.There are no significant design issues associated.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the planned residential district
with the several modifications which we have indicated above,
and the construction of sidewalk along Riverfront Drive as
requested by Public Works.
2
I 1
June 30,1992
PRD
ITEM NO.:4 Continued FILE NO.:Z-4987-B
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11,1992)
The application was represented by Mr.Joe White of White-Daters,
Inc.Mr.White presented a modified preliminary plat for this
proposal which reduced the total number of lots to fifteen.
Mr.White addressed the several questions raised by staff as to
easement lines,right-of-way lines etc.He pointed out the plat
would be clarified in order for these issues to be made clear.It
was indicated the sidewalk would be constructed as requested.
There was a general discussion of the proposal resulting in the
Committee forwarding the item to the full Commission for final
resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The Planning staff offered its recommendation of approval of this
planned residential district.The only add on or continuing item
for resolution attendant to this project consists of the sidewalk
requirement adjacent to Riverfront Drive.Staff reported that the
Parks Department has devised a project which will provide a bicycle
or hiking trail along Riverfront Drive to tie several parks.
Mr.Joe White was present and represented the proposal.Mr.White
indicated that his client was agreeable to build a sidewalk or in
the instance of the bicycle trail offered in lieu contribution
which will be linked to the actual sidewalk cost.The Chairman
then asked the Parks Department representative if he would offer
comments on the proposal.Mark Webb,representing Parks and
Recreation,presented a brief outline of the proposed bicycle trail
which he indicated would tie several parks along the river in a
continuous pedestrian relationship.He indicated that continuity
of the project for similar types of material throughout would be
appropriate.A commissioner asked Mr.Webb if it would not be
possible to perhaps locate the trail away from the current proposed
alignment on the east side of the parkway.The reason being that
this location appears to present danger car turning movement
throughout the area at the intersections.
A brief discussion of that suggestion resulted in no specific
action.After a brief follow-on discussion,a motion was made to
recommend approval of the planned residential district as modified
to 15 lots with the several design changes,and permission to
extend the in lieu contribution for the Riverfront Drive sidewalk
in the amount of the estimated sidewalk cost.The vote on the
motion passed by 9 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and 1 abstention
(Walker).
3
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:S-948
NAME:Quality Foods Site Plan (Subdivision)
LOCATION:South side of West 34th at Mary Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
DON KIRKPATRICK ROBERT J.RICHARDSON
4901 Asher Avenue 1717 Rebsamen Park RoadLittleRock,AR 72204 Little Rock,AR 72202568-3141 664-0003
AREA:8.57 Ac.NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:I-2 PROPOSED USES:Night Watchman's Residence
PLANNING DISTRICT:9 NAME '-63 0
CENSUS TRACT:19
VARIANCES RE UESTED:None
A.PROPOSAL RE UEST:
This application is a request by Mr.Don Kirkpatrick toretainasmall-frame residence existing on the site.Thisresidencewasoccupiedbythepreviousownerpriorto
Mr.Kirkpatrick redevelopment in the area.A building
permit was issued for the commercial building now underconstruction,with a condition that the house be removed.
Mr.Kirkpatrick indicated he would utilize this residence as
a security guard residence if permitted by the Planning
Commission.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The land area involved in this application is generallyflat.There are no significant drainage or land use
questions in the area.The site is clear except for theareaunderconstructionforanewbuildingandparkingfacilities.The small-frame house lies in the northwest
quadrant of the lot,taking direct access to 34th Street.
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Construct Master Street Plan improvements on West 34thStreetwitharight-of-way of 70 feet and the pavementsectionwillbe36feetforcurbs,gutters and sidewalk.
Detention and Excavation Ordinance will apply.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 Continued FILE NO.:S-948
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
The site plan as submitted presents a complete application.
The issues attendant to this plat are off-site dealing withtheadjacent34thStreet.
E.ANALYSIS:
The staff finds no fault with the layout and design of the
proposal as submitted by Mr.Richardson.There are nospecificissuesattendanttothesiteplan.This is a
conventional two structure multi use site plan,which has
been approved by the Commission on numerous occasions.DuetothesignificantinvolvementintheadjacentblocksbyMr.Kirkpatrick's development,it is entirely appropriate to
have on-site security.This residence will serve that
purpose quite well.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the subdivision site plan as
submitted subject to the comments of Public Works.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11,1992)
Mr.Robert Richardson was in attendance and represented the owner
and the application.Mr.Richardson explained the reason for thesecuritystructureandMr.Kirkpatrick's attempt to redevelop asignificantpartofthisneighborhood.Richard Wood of staffofferedtheseveralcommentsofPlanningandPublicWorks.
The discussion then moved to the requirement for street
improvements and sidewalk.Mr.Richardson indicated that the
building permit issued on the property carried a requirement forthe36footroadwaycurbandgutter.However,the sidewalk was
not an issue in his estimation.He felt the sidewalk requirement
would be better placed on the north side of 34th Street.
A lengthy discussion followed when the Public Works staff
indicated that the 70 foot right-of-way dimension,indicated intheirpreviouscomments,was for an open ditch section and not,
appropriate to the conventional 36 foot street.Sixty feet ofright-of-way is proper.There being no issues other than the
sidewalk,the Committee forwarded this item to the full
Commission for final resolution and determination as to the
requirement for a sidewalk and its proper placement.
2
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:5 Continued FILE NO.:S-948
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The Planning staff offered its recommendation of approval of the
subdivision site plan as requested by Mr.Kirkpatrick.Staff
offered a brief overview of the single issue which has placedthisitemontheregularagendafordiscussionthatbeinga
request by Public Works to construct a sidewalk adjacent to
West 34th Street.Mr.Robert Richardson,the engineer for the
project,was present.Mr.Richardson presented an overview of
his applicant's development proposal.His comments included a
statement which indicated his feeling about the sidewalks,whichis,that they would be more appropriately located on the north
side of the street because that side of the street relates more
to the Asher Avenue area.Pedestrian access from the adjacent
residential structures would be better to this street.He
pointed out that his project was approved and the current
commercial building began construction based upon the requirement
that his client build half of a 36 foot street with curb and
gutter.Sidewalk was not assessed at the building permit level.
There were no objectors in attendance.A lengthy discussion ofthisproposalfollowedresultingintheChairmanaskingfor
direction of staff as to a possible resolution of this matter.
Staff responded by recommending that the sidewalk issue be
deferred until such time as the 34th Street project became a
reality as a public project.At that time,if a sidewalk is
determined to be located on the south side,Mr.Kirkpatrick would
provide the cost in front of his premises.
The Commission accepted this recommendation.A motion was made
to approve the site plan as submitted and incorporating thestaff's recommended sidewalk approach.The motion passed by a
vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
3
I
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:Z-2959-E
NAME:Systematics Site Plan Review (0-2)Amended
LOCATION:4001 Rodney Parham Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER
ARCHITECT'YSTEMATICS
CROMWELL
BY DICKSON FLAKE One Spring Street
4001 Rodney Parham Little Rock,AR 72201LittleRock,AR 722
AREA:45.8 Ac.NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-2 PROPOSED USES:Technology Center
PLANNING DISTRICT:1 NAME:River Mountain
CENSUS TRACT:42.06
VARIANCES RE UESTED:
1.Height of principal structures —Seven (7)stories at 100 feet
A.PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This application is a modified 0-2 site plan review for theSystematic's development lying adjacent to Highway 10 andInterstate430.The project consists of a number of largebuildings,parking areas and access drives.The current
plan has been in place for several years.The current
proposal before the Commission is to modify that plan for
purposes of moving the data center office building from thesoutheastquadrantofthesitetothenortheastquadrant.
The plan also includes an expansion of the proposal to aseven-story building with an attached emergency auxiliary
power system.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The area of the site plan involved in the new buildingsiteisthepreviouslocationofaresidenceoccupied by
Mr.Charles Taylor.The residence was entered from the
frontage road along Highway 10 and Interstate 430.
1
I I
June 30,1992
ZONING
ITEM NO.:6 Continued FILE NO '-2959-E
C.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works reports that the applicant will be
participating in a city project to expand the traffic
carrying capacity of Rodney Parham Road from Highway 10 to
their south boundary.There participation will be limited
to the immediate frontage of their property.
D.ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:None
E.ANALYSIS:
The staff review of this proposal reveals that there are no
issues or consequences for discussion.The plan as
submitted is in the proper form and illustrates all of the
needed information.The only item or issue the Commission
needs to specifically take note of is the height variance.
The Planning Commission should in its motion dealing with
this item specifically extend the variance to 100 feet to
allow the seven-story building.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the site plan amendment as
proposed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 11 g 1992)
Mr.Dickson Flake was present and represented the application.
Richard Wood of staff offered several brief comments concerning
the proposal.Mr.Flake responded to several questions of the
Committee,concerning the relationship of residential adjacent
and the proposed project on Rodney Parham.Jerry Gardner of
Public Works pointed out that the access road,entering this plan
amendment area,would be terminated when the Rodney Parham
project is completed and due to the redesign of the intersection
at Highway 10.It was also pointed out that it would not
necessarily limit access to the site because there is an adjacent
roadway through an office complex,immediately to the north and
west of the site.
There being no specific issues for a resolution,the Committee
forwarded this item to the full Commission for final resolution.
2
June 30,1992
ZONING
ITEM NO.:6 Continued FILE NO '-2959-E
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
Staff presented its recommendation of approval of the modifiedSystematics'ite plan.Staff pointed out that there were no
continuing issues and that there had been a significant notice
through the neighborhood and meetings with various parties.A
commissioner posed a question as to whether the height of the
building,projected at seven stories or 100 feet,was a variance
included within the application.Staff reported that it was
included and the Commission had jurisdiction.
After a brief discussion,the Commission determined to place this
item on the Consent Agenda for approval.A motion to this effect
was made and the motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays
and 2 absent.
I
3
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 Continued
Little Rock Waste Water Utilit
A sewer main is located on the property,contact Waste Water
Utility for details.No permanent structure may be built
over existing sewer main without permission from the Waste
Water Utility.
6.~Anal sls
This item is before the Commission due to a pending
enforcement action.National Home Center,a building and
garden supply business,has grown steadily for the last
several years.Due to the customer demand,the store owners
have continually had to add to the supply of lawn and garden
materials.Therefore,the owners have expanded the outside
display to the point,where it has become a violation of the
City Zoning Ordinance,blocked access to fire service
equipment,and has become bothersome to the neighbors.
The concerns of the neighbors come under three areas:
1)noise (from the forklifts and the loading/unloading
activity),2)visual (they are able to see some of the
activity),and 3)rodents (from the outside display areas).
The Fire Marshall's concern is related to assurances that
access is maintained to the fire service equipment,located
on the southeast corner of the building and fire hydrant at
the east property line midway between the building and West
Markham Street.This access has been blocked by fencing and
gates as well as vehicles and materials.
The applicant hereby proposes the following improvements and
changes in the operation as a means of dealing with these
concerns,while at the same time allowing them to continue
to serve the Little Rock customers'eeds for lawn and
garden supplies.
1.They agree to remove all storage from
the area north of the store,and utilize
this area for employee parking.this
will eliminate most of the noise and
visual problems for the neighbors,and
bring the parking back in line with city
requirements.
2.They agree to install a 6 foot wood
fence/screen along the top of the
retaining wall as shown on enclosed
sketch (north wall and part of the east
wall).This will help solve both the
visual and noise problems the neighbors
are experiencing.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 Continued
3.They agree to open access to the north
parking area and east drive by
installing a fence from the southeast
corner of the building southward to join
the existing fence,as shown on enclosed
sketch.They will restrict all parking
and display along the eastern property
line so as to assure maintenance of this
access at all times for both employees
and the Fire Department.A gate may be
installed north of the fire service "Y"
in order to restrict after hours access
to the north parking area.
4.The fire service equipment will be
relocated completely out of the display
and loading/unloading area ("Y"to the
southwest corner of the building andfireplugtoMarkhamStreet)~
5.They will assure regular pest control ofalloutsideareastominimizetherodent
problem.
6.They will landscape the areas shown on
enclosed sketch so as to improve the
overall appearance of the property.
7.They will generally "clean up"and
maintain the area around the store.
8.They agree to restrict all outside
display to the walkway area in front of
the store and the fenced area to the
south of the store (no displays in the
parking area,and only loading/unloading
in the area between the existing fence
and West Markham Street).
The applicant hopes the proposed improvements will solve
the problems created for their neighbors and address the
Fire Marshall's concerns.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the outside storage and display.
3
I
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Jim Finch represented the applicant,National Home Center.Staff
gave an overview of the applicant's requested Conditional UsePermit.Mr.Finch explained the request in more details.
He also stated that out of the list of issues presented hisclienthadaproblemwiththededicationofadditional
right-of-way for Rodney Parham.His client is leasing the
building,and therefore does not have the right to dedicate theright-of-way.
Jerry Gardner of Engineering stated if the applicant is leasing
the property,then no dedication will be required.
The committee members had no questions or concerns.This item
was sent on to the full commission for action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
Jim Finch represented the applicant,National Home Center.There
were approximately 30 to 35 people in attendance to object to the
requested Conditional Use Permit.
Mr.Finch introduced Mr.Dwain Newman,President of National HomeCenters.Mr.Danny Funderburg,Vice President and General
Manager of National Home Center and Mr.John McKay,owner of the
building National Home Center occupies.The land is land leased
and Mr.McKay as well as Puff's therefore are leasing the
property.
Mr.Finch began by pointing out to the Commission a letter
addressed to him from Jim Lawson,Director of the Department of
Neighborhoods and Planning.National Home Center has been atthislocationforaperiodoffouryears,and prior to National
Home Center,Handy Dan's operated on the site with a very similar
type of use.There has been a similar type use on the propertyforaperiodofsometwentyyears.National Home Center has seen
a tremendous growth in the garden and lawn business in the pastfouryears.The type of business which every one uses around the
home for landscaping and other outdoor needs,similar to asuperstore.In an effort to keep up with the demand of the
neighborhood and particularly the city,National Home Center has
expanded the outside storage and display of the lawn and gardenmaterials.As with similar stores in the neighborhood such as K-
Mart and Wal-Mart,National Home Center admits that they have
become somewhat of a nuisance to the neighborhood.
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 Continued
Some of the problems that the neighborhood had were noise from
the forklift,visual and rodents from the storage facilities.
Mr.Finch described in detail the changes proposed to meet the
neighborhood's concerns.
Malcolm B.Bobo represented the neighborhood.Mr.Bobo presented
to the Commission a petition with 65 signatures.Most of the
residence have lived there for some 30 years or more,when the
property was rezoned from residential to commercial.There was a
battle to keep the property residential.
There were also specific restrictions placed on the rezoning
request.The restrictions were to be a masonry wall with the
zoning of light commercial.National Home Center has expanded
far beyond the scope of the previous tenants.They have gone
from inside with a minimal outside display to a major outside
display as well as storage.
Scott Pfleesor of 14 Markwood Drive then addressed the
Commission.Mr.Pfleesor stated that his concern was the noise
level.
Alfred C.Hughes of 13 Markwood Drive stated his concern was the
noise level and declining value of his property.
Anne Roark of 5 Markwood Drive stated her concern was the noise
level.
Sally Snoke of 11 Nob Hill stated that she personally went down
to National Home Center to complain about the noise and storage.
Mr.Finch addressed some of the concerns brought up by the
residents.He informed the Commission and residents that the
noise will not stopped by denial of the Conditional Use Permit.
He explained the only thing which was illegal is the outside
storage,and the noise and visual problems will still exist.
Dwain Newman,President of National Home Center,stated that he
wanted to address some of the concerns of the neighborhood.In
regard to the traffic,he does not feel that National Home Center
is increasing the traffic.The store hours are from 8:00 a.m.to
8:30 p.m.and there should not be anyone on the property after
then.He stated that as long as he has been in the building
material business,he had never seen a rodent.He was also
shocked that Burger King would oppose the Conditional Use Permit.
John McKay of Parham Properties stated that his company owns the
building,but is leasing the land.
5
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 Continued
Mr.Bobo asked whether Mr.Finch was correct when he stated thatdenialofthepermitwillnotchangetheuse.Staff stated that
the statement was correct.A commissioner asked if the residents
would be willing to work with National Home Center if the storage
was enclosed.Mr.Bobo stated no the neighborhood would not
support the permit if it was enclosed.
Staff gave an overview of the history of the site.As far backaswhenMagicMartleasedtheproperty,there had been someoutsidestorageanddisplay,primarily for seasonal items such as
plants and lawn and garden supplies.
Further discussion took place among the commissioners,applicant,the objectors and staff.The discussion centered around thelevelofoutsidestorage,National Home Center's rights,
landscaping,parking and more enclosure of the building.
A request was then made to defer this item until August 11,1992
meeting in order to allow for the applicant and neighborhoodtomeet.The request passed by a vote of 9 ayes,1 nay and
1 absent.
6
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:8
NAME:Pulaski Academy —Master Plan
Amendment —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-4246-B)
LOCATION:12701 Hinson Road
OWNER APPLICANT:Pulaski Academy/Sally Bowen,Agent
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for an amended Master Plan
for a school facility.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS
1.Site Location
This site fronts on Hinson Road (a principal arterial)and
is situated approximately 600 feet west of the intersection
of Hinson Road and Napa Valley Road.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The heaviest concentration of single family uses lies to the
west,with some scattered single uses to the north and
south.A church lies to the east.The property slopes
gently from south to north.This use is compatible with the
surrounding area.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
Four existing drives serve as access from Hinson Road.
The number of parking spaces required is 201.While this
plan only allows for 181 parking spaces (7 handicapped
accessible),a parking permit will be required beginning
next year,and the number of spaces will be limited.The
school also has a mutual shared agreement with Fellowship
Bible Church.This post spring the existing parking was
revised to allow more on-site loading/unloading.The
changes were necessitated by the widening of Hinson Road and
the need to avoid stackup of traffic on Hinson Road.
Therefore,a great deal of parking spaces are now loading
zones,and is frequently used for overflow parking.The
number of parking spaces was computed as follows:
1.Pre-school/Kindergarten 14
(14 teachers,1 space per worker)
2.1-6 grades 25
(25 classrooms,1 space per classroom)
3.7-12 grades 162
(27 classrooms,6 spaces per classroom)
Total 201
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 Continued
4.Screenin and Buffers
Any new screening and buffers will be provided per the
Landscaping Ordinance.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
The applicant will have to comply with the Detention and
Excavation Ordinance.
6.~Anal sis
In February of 1992,the applicant was granted an amended
Conditional Use Permit for a period of two years at which
time a master site plan had to be submitted for review.
The following information has been provided by the
applicant.In 1982,the existing building area was
approximately 95,400 square feet.A total of 68,990
additional square feet was approved for the original
Conditional Use Permit.The total number of square feet
completed since 1982 is as follows:
1.Band room —1984 2,900 square feet
2.Gym expansion —1984 3,000 square feet3.Pre-school/Kindergarten
expansion —1991 4 460 square feet
Total 10,360
Ten years later,the school proposes to add approximately
81,172 square feet of physical expansion requiring
46,190 square feet of ground area,as compared to
53,750 square feet ground coverage in the approved
Conditional Use Permit.(See attached Chart A)This
expansion along with the ground expansion shown on the site
plan are proposed to be constructed in phases listed below:
Phase I
A.New drive and parking to south (110 spaces)
B.Underground drainage (455 feet)
C.Conversion of bathroom space in gym to locker room
D.Renovate part of existing building
Phase II
A.Relocate practice field (160 X 180)
B.Underground drainage
C.Construct two-story,12 classroom building with
elevator,6,000 square feet locker room,weight room
and maintenance space (27,000 square feet).(Covered
entry to existing gym and future field house.)
2
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 Continued
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the amended Master Plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Neither the applicant nor a representative was in attendance.
Staff gave the committee members an overview of the applicant's
request.The committee members had no additional questions
or concerns.This item was sent on to the full Commission for
action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The applicant was represented by Sally Bowen.There was one
person present in opposition.Sally stated that there were two
main issues for the Commission.One being the placement of three
portable buildings and another being approval of the master plan.
A meeting was held with the neighborhood.There was some
opposition at the meeting.She along with some neighbors walked
the site to see what would be the best location for the placement
of the portable buildings.
Tom Hughes,Administrator of Pulaski Academy,addressed the
Commission.Mr.Hughes state that the chosen site is the best
for the students and staff,without having a traffic problem.
The school is very sensitive to the concerns of the neighborhood.
Jonathan Head spoke to the Commission about the location of the
portable buildings.The people which he represented were not
aware of the new location and he just wanted this to be on
record.
Further discussion took place regarding the overall master plan.
A motion was then made to approve the overall master plan and
placement of the three portable buildings.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
4
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:9
NAME:Western Hills Baptist Church—
Conditional Use Permit (Z-5570)
ADDRESS:12418 West Cantrell Road
OWNER APPLICANT:David Hampton/Mike Andrews,Agent
PROPOSAL'Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for a church.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.Site Location
This site is located approximately one and half mile west of
Interstate 430.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
A number of different uses are located within this area of
the City.Because of such a variety,from residential to
commercial and office,the proposed church is compatible
with other uses in the area.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
One on-site drive exists off of Cantrell Road.There is a
carport with a concrete drive where possibly two to three
cars could park.
4.Screenin and Buffers
The applicant plans to use the existing mature vegetation
which is on the site.Bob Brown has indicated that more
landscaping is needed in order to meet the ordinance and
overlay district requirements.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
The applicant has to provide more information on the parking
for the church.The Detention and Excavation Ordinance does
apply.Sidewalks will be required on Cantrell Road.
Little Rock Waste Water Utilit
The applicant will be required to provide a sewer main
extension with easements.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 Continued
6.A~nal sis
This case is before the Commission due to a pending
enforcement action.There is a one-story brick and frame
house on the site.The existing pool and deck are to be
removed.
The church has been in operation since April 1,1992.It is
the understanding of staff that no contact was made with anycitydepartmentbeforetheapplicantlocatedonthesite.
Zoned R-2 single family,a Conditional Use Permit is
required for the church to utilize the property.
The membership for the church is fifteen to twenty people.
As the applicant states in his letter,the membership is
small and does not have a great deal of money at present
because they have to keep expenses as low as possible.If asubstantialgrowthhappenswithinthenextyearorso,theywillhavetobuildorrelocate.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit
subject to the parking requirement being met per the number
of members and the deferral of the engineering and overlaydistrictrequirementsbeingapprovedbytheBoardofDirectors.
The Commission will need to offer a recommendation of
approval or denial which will also be sent to the Board ofDirectors.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Mike Andrews represented the applicant.Staff gave an overview
of the applicant's request.Mr.Andrews stated to the committee
members that his church was small and have limited funds.He was
very concerned about the requirements of Engineering and overlaydistrict.
The Chairman stated to Mr.Andrews that the committee members
understood his concerns,but unfortunately the house which he is
leasing just happens to be located in one of the most sensitive
areas of the city.
Jim Lawson then stated that since this is a temporary use andifthechurchgrows,it will have to relocate to another area
or build on the site.Mr.Lawson explained that he felt the
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 Continued
property would not remain single family in the future.TheapplicantcouldrequestadeferraloftheengineeringandoverlaydistrictrequirementsbeforetheBoardofDirectors.
Mr.Andrews stated he would be willing to request a deferralbeforetheBoardofDirectors.Staff stated that Mr.Andrews
needs to put his request in writing and present it to them before
June 30,1992.
The parking was also another area of concern for staff.Even
though the applicant's church is small in members,the parkingisinadequate.It was explained that the parking requirementwillbelimitedtothenumberofmembersattendingthechurch.
Mr.Andrews stated that he understood the condition for approval.There was no more issues discussed.This item was sent on tothefullCommissionforaction.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The applicant was in attendance.There were no objectorspresent.As part of the Consent Agenda,this item was approvedsubjecttotheparkingberestrictedtothenumberofmembers andtheBoardofDirectorsapprovingthedeferralofthestreet
improvements and Overlay District requirements.This item was
approved by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
3
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:10
NAME:Lusk's —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-5573)
LOCATION:2600 Cottondale Lane
OWNER APPLICANT:Pleasant Valley Company/Jim Lusk,
Agent
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for a golf driving range.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS
1.Site Location
This site is located on the southwest corner of RiverfrontDriveandCedarHillRoad.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The surrounding land uses are a mixture of commercial andoffice.This site is zoned C-3 General Commercial.The useiscompatiblewiththeneighborhood.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
The on-site drive will be off of Cottondale Lane which is acul-de-sac.Approximately 20 parking spaces-will be
provided on-site.
4.Screenin and Buffers
The screening and buffers will be provided per the
landscaping ordinance requirements.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
Sidewalks will be required on Riverfront Drive and CedarHillRoad.The applicant will have to formally close the
Brookwood Drive if the right-of-way is to be covered.
Little Rock Waste Water Utilit
A sewer main is located on property,contact Waste WaterUtility.
6.A~nal sls
The applicant is petitioning the Commission for approval toconstructandoperateagolfdrivingrange.The property is
zoned C-3 General Commercial.A Conditional Use Permit isrequiredundertheuseofamusement,commercial outside.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 Continued
In the applicant's letter to the Commission it is statedthatthedrivingrangewillbea"top of the line"targetcoursewithmanyamenitiesnotavailable,at the existingdrivingrangesinLittleRock.It will have target greenstoshoottoatdistancesof100,150,200 and 250 yards.
Normal hazards which exist on championship golf courses willbebuiltsuchassandtrapsandwater.A plaque will belocatedattheteeboxshowingthedifferentgreensand theyardagestoshootat.This will eliminate the unsightlyyardagesignswhichareseenatotherdrivingranges.
An attractive proshop will be built,which will include asnackbarandoffernewandusedgolfequipmentforsale.Local teaching pros will be available at the driving rangetoteachgroupsandindividuallessons.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permitsubjecttotheapprovalofadeferralofthesidewalks bytheCityBoardofDirectors,and the applicant's petitionforBrookwoodDrivetobeclosed.
The Commission will need to offer a recommendation ofapprovalordenialforthedeferral.This recommendationwillbesentontotheBoardofDirectors.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Bill Hasting represented the applicant.Staff gave an overviewoftheapplicant's request.Mr.Hasting stated that the onlyissuehisclientsdisagreewithisthesidewalksonRiverfrontDriveandCedarHillRoad.His clients are leasing the propertyforaperiodofthreeyears.The cost of putting in sidewalkswillbeapproximately$25,000.Mr.Hasting said that his clientsjustdonothavethemoneynordoesitmakesensesincetheywillonlybeatthislocationforthreeyears.
Jerry Gardner along with the staff and committee members agreed.However,sidewalks are a requirement of the Master Street Plan
and the Board of Directors are the only ones who can defer orwaivetherequirement.Mr.Hasting stated that he would petitiontheBoardofDirectors.
Staff also informed Mr.Hasting that the Planning Commission willneedtoofferarecommendationofapprovalordenialwhichwillbesentontotheBoardofDirectors.
The committee members had no additional questions or concerns.This item was sent on to the full Commission for action.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30'992)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requestedthisitembewithdrawnwithoutprejudice.The request was
approved by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
3
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:11
NAME:Second Genesis —Conditional Use
Permit (Z-5574)
LOCATION:2212 Fillmore Street
OWNER APPLICANT:Arkansas Methodist Children'
Home —United Methodist Church
of Arkansas/Second Genesis
Ministries,Inc.
PROPOSAL:A Conditional Use Permit is
requested to allow use of the
property for a rehabilitation
half-way house for women
leaving prison.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.Site Location
This site is located north of the University of Arkansas
campus along Fillmore Street.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
This area is generally known as the Oak Forest Neighborhood.It is characterized by almost total development of
residential properties.The requested use of the propertyiscompatiblewiththeneighborhood.The University of
Arkansas at Little Rock is a major land user.The
university has a significant influence on the surrounding
proeprties.
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
There is one on-site drive off of Fillmore Street.Parking
will be provided on the site.However,on-street parking is
being allowed by the City.
4.Screenin and Buffers
There exist quite a large amount of mature vegetation on thesite.If more landscaping is required,the applicant will
comply.
5.Cit En ineer Comments
There are no engineering comments.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 Continued
6.A~nal sis
Second Genesis Ministries would like to develop a
rehabilitation program by way of a halfway house for women
(mostly younger mothers)being paroled from the Women'
Prison Unit at Pine Bluff.
Second Genesis,Inc.is a non-profit volunteer organization.
The Board has the opportunity to lease,for at least one
year,a house owned by the Arkansas Methodist Children'
Home which is connected to the United Methodist Church in
Arkansas.The house is a part of the property owned by the
Children's Home,which is north of the University of
Arkansas at Little Rock campus.
There are no dwellings on either side of the house nor in
the back.The house is surrounded by wooded areas,except
in the front where it faces the street.
The goal of the ministry is to have four to eight women
living in the house as a family unit,cooking and eating
together,with each having household responsibilities.
They will be enrolled in training or educational courses
and receive appropriate counseling.
These women will be selected through a process that will
determine which ones will most likely fit,within the
rehabilitation mold,which was developed by a Second Genesis
study.The Board of Directors of Second Genesis expect the
women,who are rehabilitated,to be able to return to their
families and community from which they came as viable
citizens ready to successfully fit within the framework of
law abiding family and community living.
There will be two regular paid staff members along with
volunteers and members of the Board who will be working with
the women living in the home.
The Board of Directors of Second Genesis,Inc.has spent
three years in the planning and development process and is
now ready to facilitate the project.Hopefully,the project
will be in operation by mid-summer.
7.Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for
no more than eight women.
2
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JUNE 11,1992)
Several members of the Second Genesis Ministries were in
attendance.Staff gave an overview of the applicant's request.Staff informed the committee members that the applicants were
having a problem with locating the legal for this particular lot.
The only legal which can be provided is for the entire property.
Therefore,the applicant has obtained a list of the house numbers
of the properties within 200 feet of the single family structure.
The Chairman stated the notice requirement will have to be waived
by the Commission.The applicant needs to make all efforts
possible to contact the residences in the neighborhood,
especially UALR even though they may not be within the required
200 feet.
No additional discussion took place.This item was sent on to
the full Commission for action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
A representative of the applicant was in attendance.There were
five people present in opposition to the requested Conditional
Use Permit.
Jane Coyne,President of Second Genesis,addressed the
Commission.She stated that Second Genesis is a nonprofit
organization consisting of several denominations of Christian
Ministries.The Conditional Use Permit is being requested to
provide transitional housing for women leaving prison.The
entire program is to develop a program which will assist the need
of many young mothers to be paroled from prison,and provide them
with the necessary rehabilitative programs to readjust to life
such as learning job skills,substance abuse,parenting and
educational.
The goal of the ministry is to have four to eight women living at
the residence cooking and eating together,with each having
household responsibilities.The women will be processed and
selected between the Department of Correction Parole Board and
Second Genesis.There will also be two paid staff persons livingatthehouseaswellasvolunteerssupervisingthewomenatall
times.The Board of Directors of Second Genesis has spent three
years developing the program and hopefully,it will be
operational by the end of summer.
Second Genesis has received statewide support for the program.
At no time will the residence become permanent for any of the
women.Presently,there is no place in the State for this typeoftransitionforwomen.
3
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 Continued
Doris Gates then addressed the Commission.She stated that she
understood the fears of some of the residences of the
neighborhood.However,she strongly supported the efforts of
Second Genesis and wanted to reassure the neighborhood that the
project will not place any undue hardship on the neighborhood.
Sue Landenwich also wanted to speak in support of the Conditional
Use Permit.She stated that these women need a chance to be
given the opportunity to become productive citizens of the city
and state.
Phyllis Smith spoke to the Commission in opposition to the
requested Conditional Use Permit.Ms.Smith stated that she
understood the need for this type of half-way house,but felt
that her neighborhood,which is older and established,has paid
its fair share for these types of uses.She stated there is the
Arkansas Enterprises for the Blind,Methodist Children's Home and
UALR.While the neighborhood has given the three
institutions'upport,they have been very disruptive to the neighborhood.
Ms.Smith went on to explain there is a sufficient increase in
traffic due to UALR,and now the neighborhood has been informed
that the Methodist Children's Home is getting ready to house
adolescent male offenders.
Ms.Smith stated that the neighborhood thinks the concept of
helping these women is good,however,the neighborhood already
provides support to three institutions.There should be some
other area in the city which can provide support for a program
like Second Genesis.A petition was presented with approximately
100 signatures.
Dana Venhouse stated her main objective is the fact that the
neighborhood has not had an opportunity to review the plan which
the speakers earlier had referred to.Ms.Venhouse further
stated that she felt a good effort has not been made to contact
the neighborhood.
Cecil H.Yielding addressed the Commission.Mr.Yielding stated
that he lives within 200 feet and has put up with the problems of
the Methodist Children's Home for several years.He has retired
and does not want to sale out because of the half-way house being
placed on the property.
Further discussion continued among the Commission,
representatives of Second Genesis and the neighborhood opposition
regarding staffing of the program,crime,the program at the
Methodist Home for adolescent offenders,and communication with
the neighborhood.
4
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 Continued
A motion was then made to approve the Conditional Use Permit for
no more than eight women for a period of one year.After the one
year period,a return to the Commission for review is required.
The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes,3 noes,1 abstention and
2 absent.
Since this item did not receive six affirmative votes,it is
automatically deferred for two weeks.This item will be heard
again by the Commission on July 14,1992.Second Genesis was
encouraged to try and meet with the neighborhood before the next
meeting.
5
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:12 Z-5572
Owner:Independent Foreign Car
Services,Inc.
Applicant:Jim Spikes
Location:6521 Lancaster
Request:Rezoned from 0-3 to C-3
Purpose:Retail Sales Auto Parts
Size:0.58 acres
Existing Use:Paved Storage Area
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Commercial,zoned C-3
South —Multifamily,zoned 0-3
East —Multifamily,zoned 0-3
West —Multifamily,zoned R-5
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request before the Commission is to rezone the property under
consideration from 0-3 to C-3.The proposal is to construct a
new building and utilize the location for the retail sale of autoparts.Currently,the site is paved and used for storage of
autos for a repair garage,located directly to the north.(A
number of years ago,the Board of Adjustment authorized using the
property for outside storage.)
Zoning is a combination of R-2,R-5,0-3,C-3,C-4 and I-2,with
the property abutting 0-3 and C-3.Land use in the generalvicinityissimilartothezoningandincludessinglefamily,
multifamily,office and commercial.The existing commercial uses
range from small retail establishments to auto services.
The 65th Street East Plan identifies the site for multifamilyuse.The land use plan shows the commercial area to start at the
property to the north,zoned C-3.Plan recognizes the existing
multifamily developments to the east and west,across Lancaster.
Reclassifying the location to C-3 is a reasonable option because
of an easement along the east property line and the site has a
stronger tie to the commercial uses.The easement is 40 feet in
width and built up so that it totally isolates the property from
the uses to the south and east.A C-3 rezoning of the site will
not impact the surrounding properties,nor will it alter a basicdirectionoftheadoptedlanduseplan.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 Z-5572 Continued
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
Lancaster Road is a collector and the Master Street Plan standardis30feetfromthecenterline.Dedication of additional
right-of-way is required because the existing right-of-way isdeficient.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the C-3 request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors and the item
was placed on the Consent Agenda.The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the C-3 rezoning by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 nays and 2 absent.
2
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:13 LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
~RE VEST:To change the land use plan in
Chenal Valley.
LOCATION:Chenal Valley —North slope
SOURCE:White-Daters (Deltic Farm and
Timber)
STAFF REPORT
White-Daters as agent for Deltic Farm and Timber presented staff
with a proposed street and land use plan amendment for their
ownership in Chenal Valley,and requested approval of the plan.After initial review,staff requested information as to thespecificchangesandreasonsforsaidchanges.Additional
information was requested regarding the intersection of a
proposed collector with Highway 10.As of this report,the
information has not been provided.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends deferral until July 14 or 28 so that Deltic Farm
and Timber may provide additional information.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
Staff reported to the Commmission that this item requireddeferralinordertoprovidesufficienttimeforstaffand theapplicanttoworkthroughthevariouschangesproposedforthe
Master Street Plan,the zoning and the land use plan.After abriefdiscussion,the Commission voted a motion to defer this
item until July 28,1992.The vote was 9 ayes,0 nays and
2 absent.
1
June 30,1992
ITEM NO.:14 G-23-172
NAME:Zion Street —Right-of-Way
Abandonment
LOCATION:The north half of Zion Street
between 40th and 41st Streets
OWNER APPLICANT:Various Owners/James Gilliam,Agent
~RE UEST:To abandon the north half of ZionStreet,approximately 150 feet
which abuts Lots 7,8 and 9,Block
68 and Lots 4,5 and 6,Block 93,
John Barrow Addition to the CityofLittleRock,Pulaski County,
Arkansas.
STAFF REVIEW:
1.Public Need for this Ri ht-of-Wa
The initial review from other City departments indicatesthereisnopublicneedforthisright-of-way.
2.Master Street Plan
Review of the Master Street Plan indicated no need for thisright-of-way.
3.Need for Ri ht-of-Wa on Ad acent Streets
No additional right-of-way is needed for the adjacentstreets.
4.Characteristics of Ri ht-of-Wa Terrain
The right-of-way to be abandoned is physically closed,but
opened on the record books in the City Clerk's Office and atthePulaskiCountyCourthouse.
5.Develo ment Potential
No development potential has been expressed to the staff,except for the right-of-way to become a part of the abuttingresidentialzonedproperty.
6.Nei hborhood Land Use and Effect
Surrounding the right-of-way are residential uses and if
abandoned,there should be no effect on this use.
1
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 Continued G-23-172
7.Nei hborhood Position
As of this writing,no neighborhood position has been voicedtostaff,but no notice is required when the abutting
property owners are a part of the petition.
8.Effect on Public Services or Utilities
1.Little Rock Waste Water Utility requests that all
easements remain intact since their maps indicate thereareexistingsewermainscontainedwithinthestreet
between 40th and 41st Streets.
2.Southwestern Bell Telephone Company retains the righttoreopenthispublicright-of-way if a need shouldariseinthefuture.
3.The Little Rock Water Works requests the right-of-way
be retained as a utility easement.There exist an
8 inch water main in this right-of-way.
9.Reversionar Ri hts
All reversionary rights will be extended to the various
abutting property owners whose names are a part of thepetition.
10.Public Welfare and Safet Issues
The abandonment of this unopened and unused segment of
right-of-way will return to the private sector an area of
land that will be productive for the real estate tax base.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the right-of-way abandonment subjecttotheutilities'ights being retained.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 30,1992)
The applicant was in attendance.There were no objectorspresent.As part of the Consent Agenda,this item was approved
by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
2
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
QA
D
I
~
50
RF
.
.
j'
4-
"
.
v
~
=@
-
ME
M
B
E
R
BA
L
L
,
RA
M
S
E
Y
v'
v'
v'
Vd
+
v'''
'
H
A
C
H
E
R
E
,
DI
A
N
E
A
WI
L
L
I
S
,
EM
M
E
T
T
')
v'
Av
'
'
MC
D
A
N
I
E
L
,
JO
H
N
NI
C
H
O
L
S
O
N
,
JE
R
I
L
Y
N
V'
'
v
'
'
v
'
&
v'
V''v
'
'
L
E
S
O
N
,
KA
T
H
L
E
E
N
v
v'
'
~
~
i'
,
:
:
y'
'
V'
&
a
VO
N
T
U
N
G
E
L
N
,
JI
M
v'
'
'
'
'
v
v'
'
,
v"
'7
v'
v''U
T
N
A
M
,
BI
L
L
v
~
v
v
v'
V
M
v'
,
V
N
V
V
WO
O
D
S
,
RO
N
A
L
D
V
V
'v
'
+
~,
'
/
~
~,
.
~
V
V
SE
L
Z
,
JO
E
H.
v
~
M
v'
,
~
'
~:
.
'
j
~.
'
':
.
:
:
v
V
WA
L
K
E
R
,
BR
A
D
v'
v
'
'
'
Wv
'
'
'
',
v'
'
S
v'I
M
E
IN
AN
D
TI
M
E
OU
T
BA
L
L
,
RA
M
S
E
Y
r
CH
A
C
H
E
R
E
,
DI
A
N
E
A
WI
L
L
I
S
,
EM
M
E
T
T
1:
I
G
-"
-
-
MC
D
A
N
I
E
L
,
JO
H
N
P'
-
4'
~
:
-
NI
C
H
O
L
S
O
N
,
JE
R
I
L
Y
N
P
*
OL
E
S
O
N
,
KA
T
H
L
E
E
N
z-
VO
N
T
U
N
G
E
L
N
,
JI
M
PU
T
N
A
M
,
BI
L
L
,/'O
O
D
S
,
RO
N
A
L
D
SE
L
Z
,
JO
E
H.
WA
L
K
E
R
,
BR
A
D
v
AY
E
4
NA
Y
E
W
AB
S
E
N
T
~A
.
AB
S
T
A
I
N
June 30,1992
SUBDIVISION MINUTES
There being no further business before the Commission,themeetingwasadjournedat4:55 p.m.
Date
n P @ca
Chairman ecre y
rz—