Loading...
pc_12 04 1990LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING MINUTE RECORD DECEMBER 4, 1994 1:00 p.m. I. Rall Call and Finding of a Quorum. A Quorun was present being ten in number. 11. Approval of the. Minutes of the previous meeting. The minutes for the October 23, 1990 meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members present: Members Absent: Fred Perkins John McDaniel Rose Collins Stephen Leen George Wells Kathleen Oleson Joe Selz Walter Riddick, Ill Connie Whitfield Brad Walker Jerilyn Nicholson City Attorney: Stephen Giles REZONING HEARING DECEMBER 4, 1990 DEFERRED ITEMS: REZONING ITEMS 1. Z-5382 Hwy 365 & Arch St.. Pike Unclassified to M 2. Z-5383 55101 Kavanaugh 0-3 to C-1 3.. Z-5384 2510 South Broadway R-4 to C-3 OTHER MATTERS 4. Hunters Ridge Long Form ""PRD" Time Extension Request (Z-4523). 5. New Planning District Boundaries. December 4, 1990 Item No. 1 - -5382 Owner Applicant Location: Request: Purpose Size: Existing Use: Minnesota Mining and. ManufacturingCompany Guy Amsler, Jr. Hwy 365 & Arch .Street Pike Rezone from Unclassified to M (Mining) Dining 1,594 acres, more or less (2 sites) . Milling. SURROUNDING LAND_ USE _ZONING:.. North - Floodway, Vacant & Mixed, zoned "R-2" and 111_211 South Vacant., Single Family & Industrial, zoned. "1R-21' and Unclassified. East - Vacant and Single Family, zoned Unclassified West Vacant, Single Family, Industrial and. Floodwray, zoned 11R-211, 1'C-31" and 111-211. STAFF" ANALYSIS: The land in question is owned by Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing (3M), and the request is to rezone, the acreage to "'M" Mining. There are two different locations involved with this issue and they are the Highway 365/College Station site, 385 acres, and 1,209 acres along Arch Street Pike. The property is currently unclassified because of being outside the -city. In addition to attempting to rezone their ownership, 3M has also filed an annexation petition for both sites. 3M had a contract with. the City for fire protection, but it was not renewed, and 3M was told they needed to annex to have fire protection. With both sites, the land use is fairly m..ixed, and includes single family, multi. -family, commercial, industrial and several churches. There are also several parks in chase proximity to both locations and some of the lana is undeveloped. Zoning .in both areas is a mixture of "R-211, FIR -511P 1"C+-3011 01-20, and 111-311. Also, much of the land area is unclassified at this time. ij December 4, 1990 item No. 1 Z-5382 (Continued in general, an I'M" reclassification conforms to the adopted plans for the two locations. The Sweet Home/College Station plan .shows the majority of the 3M property for mining. There are areas that the plan does identify as open space/buffer. one is adjacent to a portion of the east property line, which abuts residential uses. The other area is the northern tip of the ownership that is between the railroad tracks and Fourche Creek. Some of the land south of Fouche Creek is in the established floodway.. The Arch Street Pike .location is addressed in two plans, Arch Street and 65th Street East. Arch .Street Pike is the. boundary between the two Planning Districts, with the Arch Street Plan showing the 3M property for mining. 65th Street East identifies the 3M .land between I-30 and Arch Street as open space (floodway), with a narrow industrial strip abutting Arch Street. At this time, the designated open space wrest of Arch Street is heavily used by 3M. The Arch Street Plan does not identify any of the 3M property as open space and/or buffering. (one ether plan element that needs 'mentioning is the Master Parks Plan. The Little Fourche. Creek, which runs wrest of Arch Street, is identified as Priority 2 open Space.) Staff is in basic support of the requested reclassification, with some minor modifications. For the Highway 365/College Station Site, Staff is recommending the two open space areas, as shown -on the plan, be zoned "O -S". The land between the tracks and Fourche Creek is also to be dedicated to the City. (This includes a small strip outside the floodway.) The Arch Street Pike Site also has some floodway involvement that the 65th Street east plan shows as "o -s". However, the Staff is of the opinion that nothing would be gained by reclassifying this land area to "10-S'", due to the intense use of the land in the floodway. Staff is recommending that most of the entire Arch Street Pike acreage be rezoned to '"M"'", including the floodway area. There is small piece east of the railroad tracks that the Corps of Engineers has identified as part of the Fourche Creek Project for future acquisition. Therefore, Staff feels that the parcel should be zoned ""o -S"" , and the land be dedicated through this rezoning action. 2 December 4, 1990 .Item No. 1 - Z-538.2 ......... _(Continued ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1.. Arch. Street pike is classified as a principal arterial and the right-of-way standard is 110 feet, or 55 feet from the center line. Highway 365 is a minor arterial, with a right-of-way of 45 feet from thecenter line (90 feet total). 3M road is a. collector with a total right -of. -way of 60 feet. If any of the existing rights-of-way are deficient, dedication of additional aright -sof -way will be required. 2. Dedication of the floodway south of Fourche Creek (Highway 365/College station Site).. 3. Provide an easement for the floodway area west of Arch Street Pike. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the I'M" rezoning, except for the "10-S" areas identified in the staff analysis. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 1990) The applicant, Guy Amsler, Jr., was present. Mr. Amsler also indicated that two local representatives of 3M were in attendance. There were no objectors. Mr. Amsler addressed the Planning Commission and said all decisions regarding 3M's property were made in St. Paul Minnesota,. He went on to say that 3M did not have enough time to review the Staff's analysis in detail and was not prepared to respond to the reco=endations for "OS'" zoning anis dedication of land. Mr.. Amsler said that the City -did not renew 3M's fire protection contract, and 3M was instructed to annex because they were adjacent to the City limits. Mr. Amsler then gave some background on the rezoning request which 3M -decided to do to avoid having non- conforming status. He told the Commission that 3M was willing to annex and to work with the City.. He also said that he understood the reasons for the dedication of land and open space. Mr. Ansl+er then discussed the right-of-way requirements. He said theme could be a problem with Arch street Pike because of structures being close to the 3 Dec -ember 4, 19907 Items No. .1 - :Z-5382 (Continued existing right-of-way,. Mr. Amsler felt that there would be no problems with Highway 365. Jim Lawson of the Planning Staff made some comments and said that Staff would work with 3M to resolve the various issues. Mr. Amsler then discussed they 110-Srs areas and the buffer identified on the Sweet: Dome/College. Station plan. Jerry Gardner of the city Engineering Staff discussed the Arch Street Pike Floodway and described it as more of .a basin. Mr. Gardner said it was important not to add to the volume of materials in the floodway and the -land must continue to function as a floodway. Mr. Gardner said that the. City needs to work with 3M to define some limits of use within the floodway area. There was a longdiscussion about the open space zoning and .floodway lands. A motion was then made to recommend approval of the I"M"" rezoning, subject to resolving the issues identified by Staff. The nation passed by a Grote of 8 ayes, Q nays, 1. absent and 2 abstentions (Kathleen oleson and Brad Walker).. 4 December 4, 199€ Item No. 2 - Z-53.83 owner: Applicant: Location Request: Purpose; Size: Existing Use: Eva Kirby Charles A. Brawn 5510 Kavanaugh Rezone from "10 -3" to IIG-111 Commercial 0.16 acres Single Family SURROUNDING TMD USE AND ZONING North - Single Family, zoned "R-2" South - Commercial, zoned "C-311. East - Photography Studio, zoned 110-311. West - Commercial, zoned ",G-311. STAFF...YSIS c The property at 5510 Kavanaugh is zoned "10-311, and the request is to rezone to "c-1,' for an unspecified commercial use. The ,site is a typical 50 foot lot, which is the common lot width, for the Heights area. Currently, there is a single family residence on the property. Zoning in the neighborhood is "R®2111 '►R-.4111 100-3111 IIC�311#1 '"G-4 "', and "PGG" . The property in question abuts "C-311 on the west and 110-31" to the east. Across Kavanaugh, the zoning is ""C-31" and to the north is the "IR -21' area., Land use is a mixture of residential, office and,commercial. At the northeast corner of Kavanaugh and Polk, is a post office facility, and two blacks to the east is a fire station.. Between Taylor and Polk, 5510 Kavanaugh is the only remaining singly: family use on the north side of Kavanaugh. The other uses are -a photography studio, day care center, eating establishment, and two retail. uses, The .Heights/Hillcrest. Plan identifies the lot and block from Polk to Taylor for commercial uses. Therefore, Staff's position is that a "C-1" reclassification is compatible with the adopted plan and supports the request. Changing the zoning from office to commercial should not have any impact on the nearby properties because of the existing zoning pattern.. E December 4, 1990 Item No. 2 _- Z-5383 Continued)........_ �...,. One final item that meds to be mentioned .is parking. For a. retail use, the zoning ordinance requires 1 space per 300 feet of grass floor area; the necessary parking spaces are provided on site. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: None reported. STAFF RECQMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval of the "C=1" rezoning request. _LANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (december 4, 1990) F_ Thee applicant, Charles A. Brown, was present. Where were two interested property owners .in attendance, and one owner presented a letter prior to the hearing objecting to the proposed. rezoning. Charles Brown spoke and .said that 5510 Kavanaugh was the only single family residence left its the block, and Mr. Brown went on to say that he thought the structure would remain and be remolded for the new use, office or commercial. He made some additional comments about the. neighborhood and the existing development. "There was a long discussion about parking problems in the Heights commercial area. Earl, Humble, 2,018 Polk Street, objected to thecommercial reclassification. (Mr. Humble submitted the letter in opposition at the start of the meeting.) Mr.. Humble discussed parking and traffic and said the: daycare at the corner of Folk and Kavanaugh was causing problems. He suggested that a traffic sturdy should be done for the Kavanaugh/Polk intersection. fir. mumble then said that Kid Company, the daycare center, removed some of their existing on-site parking spaces to provide additional play area. Mr. Humble concluded by saying that the ordinances should be followed and he was concerned with additional commercial development. [Douglas Frank, owner of Ozark Outdoor, located at 5514 Kavanaugh., said that a rezoning should be for ars actual use. Mr. Frank stated that he had concerns with certain uses and parking was an issue in the Heights. 2'. December 4, 1990 Item No.._._._.2_._.. _-._.....Z-5.3.83...........( Continued Additional comments were offered by various individuals about parking. Commissioner George Wells said that the City needed to address the parking problem in the. Heights. Commissioner Brad Walker said that there needed to be consistency when applying the parking requirements.. The concerns with parking were discussed at length. A motion was 'made to recommend approval of the 110_1" rezoning. The nation passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 1 nay, 2 absent, and 1 abstention (Walter Riddick, III). The commission also directed the Staff to look into the traffic and parking concerns raised during the hearing. 3 December 4, 1990 Item No, 3 - Z-5384 Caner; Applicant Location Request: Purpose: Size. Existing Use: Andrew F. and Jan Hicks, Andrew F. Hick; 2510 S. Broadway Rezone from "IR -4" to "C-3" Commercial. 0.24 acres Residential and office. SURROUNDING LANO USE AND ZONING North - Residential, zoned 11,C-3" South - Multi -Family, zoned 1IR-511. East- Multi -Family, zoned 1'R-410 and 100-311. West - Commercial & Residential, zoned ''elf -4" & N'C-311. STAFF ANALYSIS: This case is before the Commission as a result of an enforcement action by the City. The owners of 2510 S. Broadway utilize the bottom floor of the structure for their architecture and interior design business, an office use. -several months ago, a sign was placed in the front yard, and they were sited for an ordinance violation. The request is to rezone the property to "C-3" for future commercial use. The site 'is 75 feet wide, with a large two story residence can it. 'The property is currently zoned "R,-4" , and the second floor is used as a rental unit. Land use found in the area is single family, multi -family, office, commercial and a church,. Directly to the north, is a lot with a residence, that has been utilized by Serenity House, but its exact use at this time is unknown. Throughout the neighborhood, there are undeveloped lots and several vacant buildings, including a large commercial structure at the northeast corner of Broadway and Roosevelt. 1 December 4, 1990 Item No. 3 - Z-5384 (Continued The zoning pattern .is somewhat fragmented and includes "R - 311r 11R-411, ""R-510, 100-10, "14-3110 sic -1""f "C -3n41 "0C-401, and "PRD". The property under consideration abuts "1C-31" on the north, "R-41" to the west, and "R-5" on the south., Across Broadway, the zoning is '1R -5t' and 090-311. Sduth of Roosevelt Road, a majority of the nonresidential properties have Roosevelt frontage. To the north of Roosevelt Road, the office and commercial zoning extends, for several blacks along Broadway, Arch and. Gaines. Even with, the 110-31" and, 11C-31' zoning, a high percentage of the properties are still used for residential purposes north of Roosevelt. A ",C-31" reclassification of 2510 South Broadway is in conflict with the adopted Central City Flan, which shows the property for residential use. The plan's commercial line is the north property line of the site in question, and the plan recognizes the existing zoning lines, for the most part. At the southeast corner of Roosevelt and Broadway, the current zoning is 110-31" and 11R-511. However, the plan does identify the two parcels for commercial use .and creates a four corner the commercial: intersection. Staff is concerned with the possibility of having a negative impact on the area by allowing commercial zoning to stove southward. This .is especially true for the neighborhood south of the property because the residential, environment and livability appear to be more stable. It would be inappropriate to increase the amount of commercial property at this time because there is an ample supply of commercial lots to the north. Recommended land use lines established by the adopted plan need to be reinforced by not endorsing the requested commercial reclassification. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Hone reported. STAFF" RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the "C-31" rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIoIa: (December 4, 1990) Andre,W Hicks, the owner of 2510 S. Broadway, was present. There was one other property owner in attendance. Mr. Hicks amended the request to 110-11" .at the beginning of the hearing. Staff indicated their support for 110-.11" and said it would provide a good 'transition from the -commercial zoning along Roosevelt Road to the residential neighborhood F, Dec -ember 4, 1990 Item No. 3�-- Z-5384 (Continued) to the south. (The item was initially placed on the consent agenda, but removed because of the property owner who had some questions.) Mr. .Hicks said his small architectural firm occupied the f'ir'st floor, and the second floor was used for a :residence. He said the house was on the historic register., and was designed by Charles Thomasson. Mt. Hicks told the Commission that stable businesses were needed in the neighborhood. He felt that parking was adequate for the. uses, and the street provided packing for the -existing .residences. Mr.. Hicks went on to explain why he filed for a. "C-3" rezoning and said that he planned to assemble other properties for a small scale commercial development in the future. Ela Mae Hodoway, owner of a triplex, located at 2521 Arch Street, then addressed the Commission. Ms. Hodowiay discussed the neighborhood and said she kept her property clean and well maintained. She :made some additional comments and said she had no objections to the office rezoning. 'These were some discussion on the parking requirements and other related issues. A nation was wade to recommend approval of the 110-111 rezoning as amended. The motion was approved by vete of 8 ayes, 4 Mays, and 3 absent. December 4, 1990 item No. 4 - OTHER MATTERS NAME: Bunter's Ridge :Planned Unit LDevelopnent Time Extension LOCATION: Mate Highway 10 at Sam Peck. Road, north side of highway. DEVELOPER: Winrock Development Company 2101 Brookwood Drive Little Rock, AR. AREA: 13,.69 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 "LAN_PlCaPOSAL; .164 apartment units request. REODUEET A two year extension beyond the allowable three year period which requires ultimate approval by the City Board of Directors by modifying an ordinance. STAFF REPORT This PRD project; is in its last year and will terminate if this extension is not granted. The four year extension will expire on December 3, 1990. The Staff received the request on October 31, 1990. REASON FOR REQUEST: A depressed multi -family market in the Little Rock area at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 4, 1990) The applicant was present. The Planning Commission briefly discussed this "PRD" time extension request. it was determined that two years extension be granted for last time. A motion to that effect was made and passed, by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, and 1 absent. (It was noted for record that this items will be submitted to the Board of Directors for finial approval.) December 4, 1994 Item No. 5 TITLE: New Planning District Boundaries REQUEST: To use physical features rather than section lines for boundaries. SOURCE • Sta f f ,STAFF REPORT The proposal is to move or change boundaries of Planning Districts to physical features. No land use changes are included. From a practical stand point, this is only an internal organizational. change. The Districts east of University and north of Fourche Creek will have few to no changes. Staff also tried not to divide neighborhoods, when developing the new boundaries. This resulted in some unusually shaped Districts. This change will make use of the new Geographic Information System easier - Particularly address data. In addition, conversion between Census and Planning Distrlct Data should be easier. STAFF RECOMMENDATION,. Approval. PLANNING. -COMMISSION ,ACTION: (December 4, 1.990) The item was placed on the consent agenda and Planning Commission voted to endorse the New Planning District Boundaries as recommended by the Staff.. 'The vote was 10 ayes, 0 nays, and 1 absent. I I 0 C4 Ea E- 'o Im ra cc z •"1EMMMOM m MINE 62 ta MMEMMEMM , M , MOIN MMMMMMM.MMMMlMl mMMmMMMmmmmm =MEN WENER 0 62 ta December 4, 1990 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at .2.,45 p.m. DATE: kt a Chairman