pc_03 27 1990LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
REZONING HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
MARCH 27, 1990
1. 00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A quorum was present being ten in number.
.11. Approval of the minutes of the previous meeting.
The minutes of the January 30, 1990 and February 13
1990 meetings were approved as mailed.
III. Members presents
Members absent:
Martha Miller
Rose Collins
Stephen Leek
Jerilyn Nicholson
Kathleen Cleson
Fred Perkins
Walter Riddick III;
;ice Selz
Brad Walker
Connie Whitfield
John McDaniel
City Atto rrneyrt. Stephen Giles
REZONING HEARING
March 27* 1990.
DEFERRED ITEMS.
A. 2=5285 Doyle Springs Road and 1-30
B. Z-5288 Fain Park at 1-630 & Maryland.
G. Parkway West Preliminary :Plat (5-344-A)
REZONING ITEMS
"R-2" to "I -ter
"R-6" to "C-31,
1.
Z-4343-8
Highway No. 10 "R-2", "MP -12",
-MF-18",
00-2",
,and
"C-2" to
r"R-2"e.,ry""My
F"-12"",
"
1 8 ""r� "0-2"
and "4 W
- 2 "N
2.
�% (� /�
Z- 4 8 Q 6- A
'[�� {. p. ®p �L West
i�li • 36th ' IX L �d G ICY & WL s t
�o
S t L 'ti:'L t
(Romine)
"R-2"
to
"R-31,
3.
Z-5303
13025 West Markham
"R-2"
to
"0-31'
4.
Z-5304
58171 and 5819 Big Oak
Lane
"R-2"
to
"C-311
5.
Z-5305
4310, 9315 .and 4320 W.
12th
"R-3"
to
"C -1'"r
C.
Z-5306
Mabelvale Pike
r"R-2"
to
"1-31"
March 27, 1990
Item No. A - 4-5285
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Sam and Charlie Chaffin
Sam Chaffin by Gene Eberle
Uoyle Springs Road and 1-30
Rezone .from "R -21T to 11I -2"t.
Warehouse
3.02 acres
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Singly: Family, Commercial and Interstate Right -
of -Way, zoned "R-21"
South - Auto repair, zoned ""R-21"
East - Industrial, zoned "R-21"
WestVacant, zoned 'OR -21"
STAPP Ah1ALY'S lS:
The request is to rezone three acres at Doyle Springs Road
and 1-30 from "R-21" to "1-211 for a warehouse use. The site
is on the south side of the interstate and, 'because of its
:ri�v,nflguration, the property has frontage on both Boyle
Springs and the service road. At this time, the land is
undeveloped and wooded.
tea.„coag
in the area south of the interstate is ”"R-2", Single
'amity. To the north of I-30, there is some nonresidential
zoning, "10-31" and 'IT -211. Land use is mixed ,along Doyle
Springs and includes single family, a gun, shop, auto repair,
warehousing and various other commercial and industrial
uses. Across Doyle Springs is a warehouse complex and to
the south is aro auto repair business. Located on a piece of
land to the north is the gun shop and a single family
residence. The same type of land use pattern is found
adjacent to Stanton Road. There are also several vacant
tracts found throughout the area.
The adopted land use plan, Geyer Springs East, identifies
the property in question as "office/industrial"". This
particular land use designation is recommended for
properties along 1-30 and extends from Doyle Springs Road to
the Southwest City Mall. Some of the off!-celindustrial area
1
March 27, 1991
Item No. . ....__ -m ...
�... _ ..............o ......... Z5285 (Cant inucdl
to the west is zoned "1-2" and the uses range from office to
warehousing. On. the Plan., the land to the east is shown as
part of the large industrial ,area. Because of the site's
location and the proposed reclassification conforms to the
land use plan, staff supports the requested rezoning change..
.. ,M,MEN ,S
Boyle Springs Road is classified as a collector which has a
right-of-way standard of 60 feet. If the existing right-of-
way is deficient, dedication of additional right-of-way will
be required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONz
Staff recommends approval of the 1EI-21" rezoning.
PI,AN.N-1tY+G...0 MS - SS.J.P..... A..CT.1.fi N. (February 13, 1990)
Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred because
the applicant failed to notify -the required property owners.
A motion was made to defer the request to the March 27, 1990
meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0
nays and 1 absent.
PLANN.._...................._..............__...._......._....._SI{]I�L.,,,A TION: (March 27, 1990)
.:z roc COMM 15 ......,_.......... ...�..........� _..
The applicant was present. There were no objectors and the
item was placed on the consent agenda. A motion was made to
recommend approval of the I-2 rezoning as requested. The
motion was approved by a vote of :10 ayes, 0 nay& and
1 absent.
2
N[arch 27, 1990
%ner: Various owners
Applicant: Jiro H. Cray
Location: Fair Park at 1-630 and :Maryland
Request: Rezone from "R-6" to "C.3"
Purpose: Commercial
Size: 1..5 acres
Existing Use: Single Family and Day Care Center
S RROUND Nq....LA1"!iP.....![dSE.... AND O3N NG:
North - Single Family and Interstate Right -ref -Way,
zoned "R-2" and "fiiii-61"
South - Vacant and. Single Family, zoned "R-3", "R -B"'
and "0-111
East - Commercial, zoned PCD
West - ,Single Family, .zoned "R-0
:STAFF ANALYSIS.:
The issue before the Commission is to rezone a total of
11 lots from "R-6" to "C-3" for some type of commercial
development. ("R-6" is the High-rise Apartment Distract and
has a maximum density of 79 units per acre.) The property
is situated at the southwest corner of the I-630/Fair :P'ar'k
interchange and has frontage on two other streets, ''Taylor
Street and West 9th or Maryland. The site is an entire city
black with the exception of one lot (Lot 1.0). A majority of
bats are occupied by single family residences and, on the
northernmost lots (1, 2 and 1.2), there is a day care center.
Lots 1 and 2 have been reduced in size by the taking of
right-of-way for I-630,.
The zoning in the neighborhood is very erratic and is made
up, of "R-3", "R-4", "R-6", no -1", 00-301 "C -3"P "1-2" and
PCD. An example of this irregular pattern can be found on
the blank to the south that is currently zoned "R-3", "C-3
and "1-2". Land use in the area reflects the zoning and
includes single family, multifamily, office, commercial and
industrial. Across Fair park on the PCD site, there is a
major development with an eating estaablishment, motel and a
convenience store with gas pumps, the most recent addition
1
Larch 27, 1990
Item....No..... ...B ` Z-52-8.8 Continued
......e...m.....e...
to the flock. North of 1-630 is the War Memorial/Little
Rock. Zoo area which is a significant public use area.
Throughout the area there are vacant lots including the
"10-111 parcel to the south.
In 1982, an ,attempt was made to rezone several of the lets
to "C-31" for a convenience stare. Two separate applications
were filed for the lags fronting Fair Park, the eastern one-
half of the block, but the requests dere heard together by
the Planning Commission. There was strong neighborhood
opposition and bath rezonings were denied by the Planning
Commission and the Board of Directors. (Based on
information from the two case files, it appears that the
proposal was to develop a convenience store on the six
lots.)
The location under consideration is part of the I-630
Planning District and is specifically addressed in the Oak
Forest Neighborhood Plan. The land use plan designates the
property in question for mined use. A conceptual plan for
Fair Park between 1-630 and West 12th shows the black as
part of a larger office and commercial area, with multifamily
uses to the south.
Staff has some concerns with the current request and cannot
,support the "C-31" reclassification as filed. By hawing to
exclude Lot 14 from the aapp1icatiran, an undesirable zoning
pattern would be created if the balance of the block is
rezoned to "Ca3". Another potential problem is the
possibility of haringau commercial use on each lot which
would lead to a fragmented land use pattern. Also, a "'C-31'
rezoning for all lots could have an adverse impact on the
single family, residences on the other blocks. The City must
also be sensitive to the zoo/park area and ghat kind of
-development pattern is appropriate for one of the few
entrances into a unique public environment. Finally, the
issue of stripping out another arterial with "C-31" zoning
should be part of the Commission's review of the request.
To ensure a quality developaent and to help minimize any
potential impacts from a commercial reclassification, staff
recommends that a PCB be utilized for the lots that front on
Fair Park, Lots 1 through 6. Restricting a commercial
reclassification to the eastern one-half of the block will
help avoid a questionable zoning configuration and also
maintain the one-half block depth for commercial properties
that exist on the wrest side of Fair Park. A PCD is needed
for this location becaa.use the process can limit the use, or
�,
March 27, 1990
Item No. B - Z-5208::.__(Coni; _nued_},
uses, and require site plan review. This should help
protect the residential interests in the neighborhood and
the Fair Park corridor which functions .as .a primary entrance
into the War Memorial/Zoo complex.
ENG I NEER.I N G�'�TTS
Fair Park Boulevard is a minor arterial which has .a minimum
right-of-way standard of 90 feet. The exiting right-of-way
is deficient so additional dedication is required for a
total right-of-way of 45 Peet from the center kine.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of "C-3" and suggests that a PCIS be
used ror the six bats that front on Fair Park Boulevard for
a spec i r i s commercial development.
PI_A.,N INC CCAMiISSTON ACTI0N t
The applicant, Jim Cray, was
objectors its attendance. Mr
was representing the owners
He then requested a deferral
to allow .for additional time
remaining lot.
(February 13, 1990)
present. There were three
Gray spoke briefly and said he
of eleven out of twelve lots.
to the .March 27, 1990 hearing
to try to secure the one
John Kerr, 901 Fair Park Boulevard, spoke and said that he
did not object to the item being deferred. Another resident
addressed the Planning Comam i s s i on and said she was concerned.
with the use of the site. The same person also indicated
that she was not opposed to deferring the issue.
A motion was made to defer the items to the :March 27, 19,99
hearing. The.motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 nays and 1 absent.
PIaANN F NiG COMMIT SS ION ACT ION
( March 27, 1990 )
The applicant was represented by Bill Hastings. There were
no objectors in attendance. Mr. Hastings addressed the
Commission and requested a 6 -month deferral. A motion was
made to defer the rezoning to the September 11, 1990
Hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, p
nays and 1 absent. (Mr. Hastings was instructed to renotify
the property owners by mail.)
3
March 27, 1990
SUBDIVISION
. . . ...... ..... . ................. .............
JTEK - N..: C
DAME: Parkway West Addition
S -344-A
LO.C.A.T.-I G.N.40 Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Bowman Road
DEVELOPER:
Parkway West, Ltd.
Flake & Company, Agent
P. O. Box 990
Little Rock, AR 72203
376-8005
AREA: 19.12 acres
ZONING: "C-311
.. . . ..... ........ --
PLANNING DISTRICT:
. -. I ... .... ........ ..
.C.B.N.SYS—ITRACT ; 42.06
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
..... . . ....
ENGINEER:
White-Daters & Associates, Inc.,
401 Victory
Little Rock, AR 72201
374-1666
NUMBER OF LOTS: 13 FT. NEW STREET: 1100
. . ... ..... ....... ... .... ...... . .......... ..........
Commercial
Rock Creek Valley (17),
None
A. P.R0P0.S.AL./-REQU4S.T
,This propoual consists of a preliminary plat filing for
13 commercial lots at the intersection of Chenal
Parkway and Bowman Road.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
.... . ..... I ... ......... . . ....
This tract of land is generally in an undisturbed state
with mature timber. The, principal arterial lying along
the south boundary is constructed as the connection to
a new just developing part of the City. The street
lying immediately on the, east, Bowman Road, Is
constructed to City standards.
I
March 27 i 1990
SUBDIVISION_;_
:Item Ido.C (Continued) _..
C. ENCINEERINC COMMENTS:
The proposed driveways on the Chena.l Parkway frontage
are in violation of ordinance ;Noss 14, 210 and 15,239.
Provide five (5) feet of additional right-of–way for
Bowman Road. Construct sidewalks on the Bowman and,
Chena l Parkway frontages. 'The Chena l Parkway sidewalks
should be adjacent to the right-of-way line, and not
adjacent to the curia. Provide street name signs for
new street. Do not use "Parkway" in name for neer
street. Stormwater Detention and Excavation ordinances
apply.
D. IS UESYLBCAL./TECBNICAUDESIGN:
The several issues, to be introduced Dere are as
follows:
1. The development as proposed does ,not comply with
the ordinance standard for curb cuts.
2. The Detention and Excavation Ordinance should be
applied.
3. Provide the street name for internal street.
4. A sketch grading plan for the physical
improvements on the site should be provided.
E. A .A.L.Y.S.1 S
The staff review of this preliminary plat indicates few
design issues. The several points made in Items C and
Dare the primary concerns of —the Planning staff and
Engineering department.
From the staff paint of view, this proposal requires
significant redesign due to curb cut requirements of
the Subdivision Ordinance. There are too many curb
cuts along Chenal Parkway and Bowman Road. The
ordinance standard is one curb cut within 304 feet of a
corner on Chenal Parkway and additional curb cuts at
300 foot intervals (Ordinance No. 140210).
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends deferral of this preliminary plat
until the next scheduled Subdivision public hearing in
order to provide sufficient time to address the
concerns painted out by Planning and Engineering staff.
2
March 27, 1990
SIV13DIVI-STON.
I.te.m ._No - .C. pnt.i nu-e—d)
S..U.BDIVIS.T.O.N (March 1, 1990)
- - I . . ... .... . . .... .... ..... . - .... .. . .... .. ..... .... . .... ....
Mr. Joe White and Rett Tucker were present representing the
application. Staff explained their concerns and reasons for
deferral. Mr. White agreed to follow up an staff comments
before the public hearing so the recommendation can be
changed.
Jerry Gardner pointed out that curb cut design needs to be
done according to Ordinance No. 14,210 which calls for a
diamond island at the entrance.
A general discussion followed during which Mr. Tucker asked
staff to explain the sidewalk and grading, plan issues. The
discussion resulted in showing Kr. Tucker appropriate sidewalk
locations and deferring the grading plan requirement until a
building permit is issued.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
........ .........
(March 13, 1990)
The staff told the Commission that the preliminary plat
needed to be deferred because of a notice deficiency. A
motion was made to defer the item to the March 27, 1990
meeting. The motion was, approved by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
.... .... .... . .... ........... .. I-- ........ .... . ..... ..... ....
PLANY.T.NG 00M.M.-I S -S -I O.N.-ACTION:
(March 27, 1990)
The Planning Commission briefly discussed this preliminary
plat. Having received assurance from the staff concerning
the reduction of the proposed driveways on the Chenal
Parkway Frontage and other design factors, it was determined
that this item be placed on the Concent Agenda for approval.
A motion to that effect was made and passed by a vote of 10
ayes, 0 noes and I absent.
3
March 27, 1990
Owner: .FCC Tract D Partnership, ranch
Properties, Inc., and Leisure Arts,
Inc.
Applicant: Financial Centre Corporation by
Ed Willis
Locant i cn: Highway No. 10 ( Johnson Ranch)
bequests Rezone from "R-2". "MF -1.2"t
"MF -18", "O-:2" and "C-2" to "R -2"i
"MP -1.2"s "MU18"s "O-2" and "C-21"
purpose: Residential, office and commercial
Size: 51.76 acres
Existing Use: Vacant
North - Vacant, zoned "R-2'',
South - Vacant and single family, unclassified
East - Single family, zoned "R-21'
West -'vacant and single family, zoned ".R-2" and "0-211
STAFF ANALYSIS:
--
The property in question is part of what is now referred to
as "The Ranch", formerly known as the Johnson Ranch. The
land area, approximately 610 acres, is situated can the north
side of Arkansas State Highway No. ld between North Katillus
Road and Patrick Country Road. Out of the total of 1110
acres, 367 acres are identified for potential development
with single family, multifamily, office and commercial uses.
Eighty-two acres are involved with this request before the
Commission and the proposed rezo n ings are "R-2", "MF -12",
"MF -18" "0-2" and C-2". Below is a summary of the existing
and proposed acreage for each zoning district.
DISTRICT
"R-2"-"rf
"MF- 1211
""
",MF -€1
1""
00-2""
PYXISSTING
219.12
19.07
7.51
57.74
y
112.25
1
RRAPPSAD
225.55
13.61
12.20
52-77
62.67
March 27, 1990
._ . ..... No._...._._..1. Z. T.4 3 4 3.::-.R:w..i
Land uses found in the general vicinity are single family
residences and an animal clinic at Drew Lane and Highway 10.
To the went of Patrick County Road, there is an area on bath
sides of highway 10 where there are a number of
nonresidential uses. A majority of the land is undeveloped
including The Ranch property. The existing zoning it "IR-2"t0%]F�12'9T" 24MF 1OC-Z" TIO -2f,1 C -Z" and "OS" which, is all found
on the north side of Highway 10. South of Highway 10, the
land is unclassified because it is outside the City limits.
In 1984,.an application was filed to rezone 148 acres of the
Johnson Ranch property to 'IMF -1211, ?IMF-18ti t 110-2"" and "'C-2"' .
At that time, the land was outside the City limits and staff
indicated that annexation was a major issue because of a
Hoard of Directors' resolution. In 1980, the Board of
Directors established ars "''official annexation boundary line"
by resolution which stated that the City would discourage
voluntary annexations beyond the defined lime until 1994.
The Johnson Ranch property was west of the annexation line
and staff felt that the Hoard first needed to resolve the
annexation issue before staff could address the rezoning
request. Also, none of the planning studies for Highway 10
had looped at the Johnson Manch area and staff asked that
the item be deferred to allow for adequate time to consider
the policy issues. The property was eventually annexed to
the City and rezoned to the requested classifications with
the addition of a 64 foist ""t}9" strip adjacent to Highway 10.
When the Highway 10 District Plan was adopted .in May 1986,
the Johnson Ranch property was identified as a Planned Unit.
Development (PUD). In the Plan text, reference is made to
the 63 acre "C-21" tract within the Johnson Ranch PUD as a
full-scale community shopping site. In 1989, the City Board
of Directors approved the Northwest Extraterritorial Plan in
conjunction with the City's intent to control zoning beyond
the City limits;. The Northwest Plan covers the Highway 10
corridor and recognizes the existing multifamily, office and
commercial zoning lines for the Johnson Ranch site, earlier
this year, both the Highway 10 Plan and the ;Northwest Plan
were amended to include an "existing business mode" for an
area to the west of Patrick Country Road.
The applicant has indicated that the proposed rezonin,gs are
not a major alteration of the initial zoning approval
because -there is little variation .in the notal acreage for
each zoning district. An example of this is the commercial
land area which decreases in size by 0.6 acres. Staff
disagrees with the applicant's assessment and feels that the
rezonings are a significant departure from the 1989 rezoning
9
March 27, 1990
and opposes the request. The existing zoning and land use
plans need to be maintained and any reclassification should
be accomplished through a PUD for a real project as shown on
the Highway 10 Plan.
It is the staff's position that the rezoning proposal is a
major change from the original concept and reorients the
commercial acreage away from large concentrated sites to a
linear land use configuration. The proposed land use
pattern increases the commercial acreage along the
Highway 10 frontage and the major interior streets which
could establish a precedent for stripping out the major
roadways in the area. This type of development usually
creates a number of small tracts with numerous commercial
uses. With the existing zoning, the potential exists for
sizeable commercial sites being developed under unified site
plans, more of a shopping center type of approach.
Following is a list of other factors and issues that the
staff considered during its review of the proposal.
The proposed reasonings do not conform to the adopted
plans - Highway 10 District, Plan and Northwest
Extraterritorial Plan.
A reclassification of the site should be done through a
PUD as encouraged in Resolution No. 8,103 and the
Design Overlay District Ordinance. Also, the
Highway 10 District Plan identifies the ranch property
as a PUD.
The proposed 11C-211 area includes the 110911 strip
adjacent to Highway 10.
Establishing four commercial corners at the
intersection of the two main interior streets.
The recent reclassification of a new
commercial/business note (the Stone's Market area) to
the west which increases the amount of planned
commercial frontage along Highway 10,
Staff feels that by committing Leisure Arts, an office
use, to a "C-21" tract, that the commercial acreage will
increase by 20 acres through this zoning action,
especially in terms of traffic generation.
It appears that the need to adjust the zoning lines is
based on a real estate transaction which is inadequate
justification for the rezoning request.
3
March 27, 1990
Item...._No,.,_i......Z ,4343. ...._ .Cont xrnu d
..u,.e.. _l .. ........ _..................... .
- The desirability of rezoning land to "C-21" that is
adjacent to a single family area. The applicant
implies in a memorandum that this type of land use
relationnhip is questionable. He attempts to justify
the "C-2" to 110-21' change for the Leisure Arts site by
stating that residential lots along the north property
line of Leisure Arts would be adjoining 110-21" Office
land instead of "C-2" Commercial which improves the
overall land use plan.
- The rezoning proposes a major shift in the zoning
-configuration which could lead to an undesirable land
use pattern along,Highway 74.
EN G T EER INC COMMENT .
The .total development of the Johnson Ranch area will
probably generate in excess of 50,000 vehicle trips per day.
All of this traffic will enter and leave the Johnson Ranch
area by way of Cantrell Road. Cantrell Road is shown in the
master street plan to be a principal arterial with a
practical vehicle carrying capacity of 40,000 to 46,000
vehicles per day. 'T'here is also a question about whether
the internal street system for the Johnson Ranch area will
be adequate to handle to daily trips that will be generated
within this addition.
'The existing Land Use Plain has shown an .Exhibit B will
produce approximately 30,832 vehicle grips per slay when
develop. 'The proposed, Land Use Plan as shown in Exhibit U
will produce approximately 37,451 vehicle trips per day if
this case is approved. A proposed zoning plan will produce
approximately 6,619 daily vehicle trips more than the
existing land use plan.
[finder the existing Land Use Plan, the developer plans to use
20.3 acres of the existing commercial area to construct the
.Leisure Arts Complex., Under the proposed Land Use Plan, the
Leisure Arts Area is shown as office zoning. 'The net
difference in the two plans is 20.3 acres more commercial
zoning than the proposed plan. The additional commercial
zoning will generate .almost 7,000 additional vehicle. trips
per day when this property .is developed.
We recommend that the developer
detailed traffic imapact, analysis
occurs in this area.
4
'be required to complete a
before further rezoning
March 27, 1990
They applicant, Ed Willis, was present. Where were two
objectors in attendance. Mr. Willis spoke and offered an
amendment to the request. He asked that Tract F on Ranch
Drive be changed from "'C-21" to ".PCD"" and then withdrew Tract
F from the rezoning request. Mr. Willis went on to discuss
the open space area oat Highway 10 and the 100 foot building
line from. Highway lila Mr. Willis also agreed to eliminate
the curb cut on Highway 10 for Tract D-1. Jim Dawson,
Planning Director, made several comments and said staff was
still opposed to the amended request.
Wayne Hherrell, Chief of Traffic Engineering, then discussed
his memorandum to .dim Lawson concerning the proposed
rezoning and traffic impacts. Mr. Hherrell said there would
be an additional -7,,000 trips with the new zoning
configuration because there was an increase in the
commercial acreage dine to the Leisure Arts development. He
went on to say that a traffic impact study was needed before
any additional rezonings were acted on, because there were
too many unknowns...
Bob Shults then addressed the Commission and responded to
the comments made by Wayne Sherrell. Mr. Shults said the
traffic impact issue was not valid because there would be
leas commercial acreage and the rezoning changes would not
increase the trips. He also said that Leisure Arts could
sell a portion of the land for commercial use if it remained
"C-211. Mr. Shults said the new street layout worked better
and the revised plan was just swapping acres. He discussed
the proposed new goad intersecting -High-way til from the south
and said all the traffic would not have to utilize .Highway
10. He gent on to say that traffic would be in the area
even without the proposed development because new roof tops
will generate additional traffic. Mr. Shults then described
the Leisure Arts site and the proposed project. He said
that only one building was 'being built at this time, and at
.least 10 acres would be available for future development,
Mr. Shults made some additional comments about a traffic
study and said that the trips would stay the same.
5
March 27, 1990
Item No.... I Z 43'13-...B. (Continued
At this point, comments were made by several Commissioners
and some questions were asked. Mr. Shults responded to
Commissioner Oleson's questions about selling, the ""C-2"'" land
to Leisure Arts. He .said a lot of Factors were considered
before selling the property and the development would be of
highest quality.
Comments were made about various issues including using the
PCD process For the site. lea^. Shults reminded the
Commissioners that there was no opposition to the rezoning
and discussed utilizing a PCD., He said the restricted
covenants in ;place were the same as any restrictions placed
on, development through, a PCD and the developers had already
reduced the number of curb cuts. Mr. Shults objected to a
PCD because it scared buyers and could jeopardize a sell.
He said there was a problem with the time constraints and
there were too many potential unknowns with a PCD.
Rd Willis discussed the "C-2'^ district and the possibility
of restricting uses under a *"C-2" rezoning.
Jim Lawson of the Planning Staff then discussed the proposal
and said it was a significant change .to the overall concept.
Mr. Lawson reviewed the original rezoning and development
scheme. He said it would be more desirabie to step down the
land rises from commercial to office to multi -family to
single family. Mr. Lawson said the proposed rezoning would:
create a new commercial site; increase the commercial
frontage on Highway 10; establish a four corner commercial
intersection; cross lunch Boulevard with commercial zoning;
rezone land adjacent to a single family area to "1C-211; and a
rezoning of the remaining office .land to commercial on
Highway iQ would be difficult to -deny in the future. Ed
Willis said there would be only one 5 acme lot next to a new
"►C-2", commercial area. Mr. Lawson said it was undesirable
to have single family lots abutting a commercial site and a
covenants Fere not as good as a PCD. Mr. Lawson told the
commission that the proposed rezoning changes the entire
concept and adds 20 acres of commercial land. Commissioner
Riddick made some comments about the original rezoning and
asked if the acreage for the commercial and office areas
were appropriate.
Dewey .Davis, 9 Johnson Ranch Road, then spoke and said he
was, looking for additional information. Mr. -Davis indicated
that .he thought the zoning wan set and there would be no
changes. He said the rezoning increases commercial ial fronta.,ge
6
March 27, 1990
Item No. 1 - Z -4343®B (Continued
which means more traffic and the new proposal spreads the
commercial land -along Highway 10. After some additional
comments, Mr. Davis said he was opposed to the proposed
rezoning.
Ruth Bell, representing the League of Women Voters,
expressed some concerns with the proposal. Ms. Bell said
that the rezoning would extend the commercial frontage on
Highway 10 and, lead to the stripping out of the roadway.
She also said the Highway 10 plan should be set in place for
a reasonable length of time before considering any
significant changes. Ms. Bell -concluded by saying" that
traffic was a major issue and a good traffic study was
needed.
Joe White, engineer for the project, said the entrance into
the property was set and the new road from the south would
be aligned with it. Mr. White made some comments about the
traffic issue and said Highway 10 was in process of being
upgraded. He told the commission that the property was
already zoned and no additional acreage was being added.
Wayne Sherrell then spoke and responded to questions from
the Commission. He also explained the methods and figures
used for making traffic projections and in analyzing the
situation.
Joe 'White said the new zoning plan was betters than the old
plan because of the improved street network and less curb
cuts.
There were some discussion about a master street plan issue
and the location of the new road from the south. Walter
Malone of the Planning Staff reviewed the issue and said
that an exact alignment had not been finalized. Ed Willis
then offered some comments about the new road and, indicated
that Deltic, Ms. Johnson and. Financial Center Corporation
had reached a basic agreement on the location of the road..
He said the road would go through Deltic and Johnson's land,
and then tie into Ranch Boulevard on the north side of
Highway 10. Mr. Willis then proceeded to talk about a
reduction in curb cuts from 1.2 or 1.3 to 6 along Highway 10
in the new plan.
Bots Shults then amended the request by withdrawing Tracts
17--1 and la' from the 11C-211 request and asked that the two
Tracts be designated as future PCD's. He also requested
that the Highway 10 plan tae changed to show an
office/commercial area for some of the Johnson Ranch
property.
7
March 27, 1990
Ttem No. ......_I..__m_ Z -4343-B (Continued).
.... ............. Continued? .... ... . ....... . ------- ... ..... .......... ....... . . ..... _ . ...........
There was a long discussion about various issues and a
number of questions were asked. Jim Lawson responded to
questions about land use transitions and said problems
usually developed -when non -,residential was adjacent to
residential. Mr. Lawson also said that the staff had some
problems with the amended request because Tract H (northeast
corner of Ranch Drive and Ranch Boulevard) was being rezoned
to "C-211. Bob Shults said a road did not create a good
break between uses and the street should not be used as a
land use boundary in a multi -use, well-planned community.
Mr. Shults also said that Tract H was reasonable for a quick
in and out commercial use and it was a logical location for
"C-20 zoning. He told the commission that Tract H would
remain in the, request for "C-211.
A motion was then made to recommend approval of amended
request and remove Tract H from the rezoning. The motion
was riot recognized because the Tract H Amendment was riot
offered by the applicant.
There was some more discussion and Bob Shults said that he
would like a vote on the request. Joe White told the
Commission that they, could act on Tracts 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 as
shown on Exhibit H. Staff then indicated support for, the
amended request with the exception of "C-21' for Tract H.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the rezonings as
shown on Exhibit H for Tracts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and part of
Tract 4, east of Ranch Boulevard; to withdraw the "C-211
areas (part of Tract 4 west of Ranch Boulevard), Tracts D-1
and F on Exhibit D; and to recommend a plan amendment for
the Highway 10 plan to show a mixed office/commercial area.
The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 nays, 2 absent, and
I abstention (Martha Miller).
0
March 27, 1:994
Item. No .......2 __.Z-4886 A_.....
Owner: L inkou.s Company, Inc.
Applicant: Dwight Linkouss
Location; West 36th ,Street and West Street
(Romine Read)
Request: Rezone from "1R-2" to "R-31"
Purpose: Single family
Since: 12.22 acres
Existing Use; Vacant
North - Public school, zoned '" l-2'1
South - Vacant, zoned '1R-21"
East - Vacant and single family, zoned 11R-2"
West - Vacant, .zoned "R=21"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The issue before the Commission is; to rezone a 12 acre tract
at the southwest corner of West 36th and Romine from "R-21"
to "1R-311. The proposal is :subdivide the site ,into 67 lots
ass the first two phases of the Stoneh:edge Subdivision. (The
land area to the west is identified on the preliminary plat.
as possible future phases.) An "R-31' reclassification is
being requested because the proposed plat shows lots that
are less than the minimum "R-2'1" standard and the concept is
to provide a: small lot development for affordable housing.
Zoning in the surrounding neighborhoods is primarily "R-21"
There is an exception and that is a cul-de-sac, Lehigh Court
which is zoned "R-41" and "PUD". Land use is more mixed and
includes single family, duplex, multifamily, a church and
Romine School. A significant percentage of land is still
vacant, and to the southeast of the :site is the location of
Kiwanis Park.
I
March 27, 1990
It1 111 -em No. 2 - Z -4886-A
In 1987, an effort was made to rezone the entire 40 acres to
"0-311 for office use and an alcohol rehabilitation facility.
Staff recommended denial of the request and the rezoning had.
strong opposition frog® the area's residents. The planning
Commission denied the 110-311 reclassification and the
Commission's action was never appealed to the City Board of
Directors.
Staff is of the opinion that an 11R-31" rezoning is a
reasonable option for the property and supports the proposed
reclassification. An 11R-3" rezoning and the subsegment
development should not have a measurable impart on the
existing neighborhoods because there already exists a
variety of housing types and sizes. Also, approximately
one-half mile to the east is the John Barrow Addition which
was originally platted for small lots and has not changed
over the years. The rezoning conforms to the I-430 District
Plan and there are no outstanding issues
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
None reported.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "R-3" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMISSI,ON ,ACTION: (March 27, 1990 )
The applicant was present. There were no objectors and the
item was placed on the consent agenda. A motion was made to
recommend approval of the 11R-3" rezoning. The motion was
approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
2
Larch 27, 1990
.Item .No. 3 - Z-5303
Own e r
Applicant.
Location:
Request
Purpose:
Sita>:
Existing Use:
Curtis and Beverly Gape
Leland B. Jones
13025 West Markham Street
Rezone from "R-211 to 110-301
Office
0.60 acre
Single family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, zoned "PCD"
South - Single family, zoned "R-211
East Single family, zoned 110-3"
West Multifamily,, zoned "MF" -1811
The .request is to rezone one lot on West Markham from 1'R-'211
to "0-311 for future office use. Currently, there is a
single family, residence on the site with two accessory
buildings. The property is situated directly south of the
new Bale Chevrolet location and east of the Shadow (Lake
Apartment complex.
Land use is primarily residential at this -tire with a mix of
single family and multifamily. Other cases found in the area
include office, -church and outside storage for industrial
use. The Bale site is currently sunder construction so, in
the near future, the carr dealership will be the most
significant land use in the area. There are also several
tracts that are still undeveloped. Zoning in the general
vicinity Is made up of 11R -s", "Mr -1811' "0-3"t "'C_311 and
11PCD" . The property in question abuts 110-311 on the east
side with the Bade PCD to the north and 'IMF -1.811 to the west.
The Upper Rock. Creek District Plan identifies the site under
consideration for office use. Therefore, the proposed 110-311
reclassification conforms to the adopted land use plan.
Staff feels that there are no issues associated with this
request and supports the office rezoning.
1
March 27, 1990
Z..t_em....Ao.r.,,. Z.7- X30!.3...... Cn .t,, .,axuzeci.}
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
The existing right-of-way of 40 feet for Farris Street is
deficient, Therefore, dedication of additional right-of-way
will be required. Farris is a residential street which has
a standard. of 5o feet or 25 feet from the center line, so
another 5 Feet is needed..
STAFF RCOMMENDATION:
...,.....,,,__ ... ,.�.. . _.,,,....
Staff" recommends approval of the 110-311 rezoning as
requested.
PLANNINGCMMIO...TION::(March 27, 1990
The applicant was present. There were no objectors and the
request was placed can the consent agenda. A motion was made
to recommend approval of the "0-3" rezoning. The motion
passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 .absent.
2
March 27, 1990
Item No. 4 - Z-5304
Owner: Frances B. Myers .and John A. Phillips
Applicant: Jahn A. Phillips
Location: 5817 ,and 5819 Big Oak Lane
Request: Rezone fromn, "IR -21" to 10C-3"
Furposec Commercial
Size: 0.45 acres
Existing Use, Single family
U_R._R........ONDI...SG LANDUSE �N._D ZONING:
....... ....... ......... ._.._......
North - Industrial, zoned 111;,211
South - Vacant, zoned "C-311
East - Commercial, zoned 11C-111
West - Commercial, zoned 11I-211
STAFF N�#L S I S :
The property winder consideration is two residential lots
situated on Big Oak Lane, and the request is to rezone the
site from "R-211 to "IC -3". There is one single family
residence on each lot; one is occupied and the other is
vacant, Big Oak Lane is located. approximately 700 feet
south of West 65th Street and east of Geyer Springs Road.
Zoning in the general vicinity is a mixture of '1R -211a 1"R-471'
""-111 .and "I-211. Theproperty in question abuts 1"C-1�1 on
the east, "C-311 on the south and "1-211 on the west. Across
Big Oak Lane the zoning is 111-21" with a large warehouse
facility on the property. Other uses found in the
:neighborhood include single family, duplex, office,
commercial and other industrial uses. Directly the south of
the two lots, the property is vacant and the southwest
corner of Geyer Springs and West 65th Street is undeveloped
at this time.
On the adopted plan for the area, 65th Street East, the east
property line of the site is also the commercial line on the
land use plan. The area between Geyer Springs road and the
existing 11C-1.1" is shown for commercial use, so the proposed
11C-3" rezoning conforms to the plan. It appears that
previous zoning actions have had very little impact on the
I
March 27, 19190
temp_.._.............__......
residential uses and it is ,anticipated that the requested
commercial .reclassification will have no effect on the area.
The site i s surrounded by nonresidential zoning and the
existing "C-1" provides a good transition between the
proposed "C-311 and the :residential properties to the east.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
Ar right-of-way of 60 .feet is needed for Jig Oak Lane and it
appears the existing right-of-way is deficient. Dedication
of additional right-of-way will be required.
STAFF REC€)MMENIIATI.QN ;
Staff recommends approval of the "C-31" request as filed.
led.
.N TN: (March 27 # 199th )
..... I N.G...._CST'it!"1_.._.._..,.._.5IO.._....,.CI
.�. ---..
The .applicant was present. There were no objectors and the
item was placed can the consent agenda. A motion was wade to
recommend approval of the "C-31" rezoning request. The
motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 mays and 1
absent.
2
March 27, 1990
Vim.... No. ......_� Z .5.,3 0 5
Owner; Loyd Sul 1 Inger
Applicant: Same
Location: 4310, 4315 and 4320 West 12th Street
Request; Rezone from "R-31" to ""C-1"
Purpose: Office and commercial
Size: 0,50 acre
Existing Use:. Single, family
5_VRR.0VND 1, N.G _ I,A►IHD a 1 5 1 TIJ► . Zt I G t
North - ,Single family, zoned
South - Single family, zoned "C-31"
East - Single family, zoned "R-31"
West - Single family, zoned "C-31"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The site in question consists of three 50 foot lots and the
request is to rezone them from "R-31" to "C-111. At this
time, there is a potential commercial user, a beauty shop,
for only one lot ( the middle one or 4315 'West 12th). The
lots are located -on the north ride of 'West 12th Street
between Peyton and Lewis Streets which is about three blocks
gest of Cedar. There are single family residences on each
of the three lots and It appears that two of the structures
are occupied.
Zoning in the area is made up of ""R-311, 'JR -4", "10-11", 110-31"
and "C-311.. The existing "C-31" at the northeast corner of
Peyton and 'West 12th was rezoned in 1972 and there was some
opposition from nearby residents. Since the early 1970's,
there has been very little zoning activity in the
neighborhood. The most .recent rezoning was to '10-11" for a
lot on West 11th and, it was accomplished about five years
ago.. Also, there have been several conditional use permits
approved for day care centers.
1
March 27, 1991
Item :._.No. ....5.,...-.__._Z_-53 5 (Cont.nued_)....._.._..._..._.........
......
Land use along West lath is somewhat mixed with residential,
office, commercial and a church. The most prominent
commercial uses in the neighborhood are the Harvest Foods
Stare at Kniest 12th and Lewis and a small strip center at the
southwest corner of West. 12th and Peyton. 4n the block& to
the south and north of West 12th, -the land use pattern is
primarily single family residences with one or two small
offices and several day care centers.
Over the years, the staff hasbeen reluctant to endorse
commercial reclassifications in Central City neighborhoods
because of the potential negative impacts on the residential
uses and: ether concerns. The Oak Forest Neighborhood Plan
recognizes this and shows the property for continued
residential use, and staff feels the adopted land use plan
should be maintained by not rezoning the lots. It can be
questiuned whether adding to the inventory of commercial
lots can be ,justified because there appears to be an ample
supply of property zoned for commercial use that is not
being utilized. The "C-31" lot directly to the west has a
single family residence on it and none of the "C-31" lots on
the south side of West 12th between Peyton .and Lewis have
commercial uses. Starting .at Peyton on: the south side of
West 12th, the .land use is a vacant commercial building,
several single family residences, church parking and .a
church at Lewis and West 12th Street,
Other issues that should be considered when reviewing this
rezoning request are the potential for stripping out Weed:
12th with a marginal development Pattern and removing
affordable housing from a Central City neighborhood. Every
effort needs to be made to preserve the existing housing in
the older neighborhoods and to avoid a wholesale commercial
conversion to blocks with vacant, nonresidential structures.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
None reported.
STAFFRE'C[� Tt«rE4w9IIDATTi11�:
Staff recommends denial of the "C-111 rezoning for the three
lots on West 12th Street.
PJ
March 27, 1990
..1 6 5-305 (-Co--n.1t.1i-nued-
)
Ph.A.N N I N..P. 1. CPM.MJ S.SJON.- A.C.T.I.O.N.: (March 27, 1990)
The owner, Loyd Sullinger, was represented by Dennis Atkins.
There were no objectors. Mr. Atkins said the properties in
question have been upgraded and two of the lots, 4310 and
4316 West 12th, have been sold. He went on to say that 4310
would be used as a residence and 4316 was the proposed
beauty shop location. Mr. Atkins said that Mr. Sullinger
owned all four lots including the "IC -31, lot on the corner
and 4320 was currently being rented.
Dorothy Harmon, the prospective buyer of 4316 West 12th,
then addressed the Commission, She said that she planned to
live in the house and operate a one chair beauty shop in the
back of the residence. Mo. Harmon said there 'would be a
separate entrance and there were adequate area for parking.
Gene Eberle, speaking for Mr. Sullinger, made some comments
about the neighborhood and the existing zoning. Mr. Bberle
said it was a good site for commercial development that was
its highest and best use. He then officially withdrew 4310
from the request and asked the, Commission to act on 4.316 and
4320 West 12th.
Comments were made about rezoning the lots to "0-111 and
utilizing the conditional use permit process for the beauty
shop. There were some discussion about 110-111 versus IIC-111
and other possible options. Staff opposed any non-
residential zoning for the location because of the, adopted
plan and potential impacts on neighborhood.
Dorothy Harmon spoke again and said she wanted to be in a
residential area and have a business with some control over
it. She told the Commission that she has a offer and
acceptance on the lot.
Dennis Atkins then amended the request to 110-111 for 4316 and
4320 West 12th with the understanding that a, Conditional Use
Permit was needed for the beauty shop. After same
additional comments, Mr. Atkins also agreed to deferring the
issue to the April 24, 1990 meeting so the 110-111 rezoning
and the Conditional Use Permit would be on the same agenda.
A motion was made to defer the rezoning to the April 24,
1990 hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays, 2 absent and I abstention. (Kathleen Gleson)
3
March 27, 1990
tel -N-o�. .....-.....,..Z...:-_: ..3 0 b....I.Con t 1 nued)
-- .... .... .... -, -
(Mr. Atkins was instructed to contact the staff about filing
the Conditional Use Permit request and there would be no
additional filing fee nor written notification of property
owners.)
4
March 27, 1990
Item No. 6 - Z--5-306
Owner, Parker Solvent Company
Applicant: Jae D. White
Location: Mabelvale Pipe
Request; Rezone from .",R-21" to '111'-iP3, 1"
Purpose: Industrial and parking
Size: 1.18 acres
Existing Use: Industrial and -vacant
.. ...... '
SURROUNDING LAND USE __r�l,l' D ZONING
North - Single family, zoned "R-21'
South - Vacant, zoned "R-31'
East - Vacant and single family, zoned "R-21"
Fest - Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department,,
zoned. "R-21"
STAFF COMMENT:
The applicant has submitted a written request to withdraw
the rezoning from the agenda. The Planning Commission must
vote on withdrawing the issue be -cause it has been advertised
for a public hearing.
IiAN_N._IIG:....0UM�'_%SSI3..N....A_C_._T....I_.?._N...: (March 2 7, 19 9 0 )
A motion was made to withdraw the 13 rezoning as requested..
The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1
absent.
1
F-4
2:
w
tra
m
Qf
H
va
cfa
.C3
tj
ta
co
ca
EA
E-
0
>
mo
F-4
2:
w
tra
m
Qf
H
�i�■■u■ni
iiCCin'�'■�'ii
Em
BE
w
ME
ammommmu
REWEEMEWEENE
EMEMEN
ENE
m
F-4
2:
w
tra
m
Qf
H
March 27, 1990
There being no further business before the Commisalon, the
meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
. ... .......... . .......
D
1
� I
......... . ..........
Secretary