Loading...
pc_01 02 1996LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING MINUTE RECORD JANUARY 2, 1996 9:00 A.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eleven (11) in number. Ii. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Commission approved the minutes of the November 14, 1995 Planning Commission meeting by a unanimous vote. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Diane Chachere Herb Hawn Ramsay Ball Bill Putnam Doyle Daniel Suzanne McCarthy Mizan Rahman Ron Woods Larry Lichty Sissi Brandon Pam Adcock None City Attorney: Cindy Dawson LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING AGENDA JANUARY 2, 1996 I. DEFERRED ITEM A. Z-5452-A II. REZONING ITEMS 1. Z-591-A 2. Z-3673-B 3. Z-6070 4. Z-6076 5. Z-6083 6. Z-6084 2322 Bragg Street 4942 W. Markham St. 10100 Mabelvale Pike 3319 Barrow Road 3800 Baseline Road East side of Cooper Orbit Road; north of Spring Valley Manor Northeast corner of West 36th St. and Shackleford Road R-4 to O-1 0-3 to C-3 R-2 to C-4 R-3 to C-3 R-2 to C-1 R-2 to MF-18 R-2 to C-3 i rG I _ Y•, p�ttu !Fe•.n > s n�. I I I Cn� a • L. .� 1 � M•r• lrnn � 1 LITTLE ROCK r�sa I i oel i I 1 6••rwne ( I i i i I ------- Location Map �� REZONING AGENDA 1�* JANUARY 2,1996 --- 1.16 — — — January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: A Z-5452-A Owner: Applicant: Elijah Hampton Elijah Hampton Location: 2322 Bragg Street; northwest corner of East 24th Street and Bragg Street (I-30 Frontage Road) Request: Rezone from R-4 to 0-1 Purpose: Office use Size: .15± acres Existing Use: Frame residential structure currently classified as "unsafe and vacant" by Housing Code Enforcement Office SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family residence; zoned R-4 and Vacant lot; zoned 0-1 South - Office and Commercial uses, zoned I-2 and old VA Hospital site; zoned PCD and R-4 East - I-30 Right -Of -Way West - Vacant lot; zoned R-4 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Dedicate 5 feet of right-of-way for East 24th to bring to commercial street right-of-way standard. Dedicate a 20 foot radial area at the intersection of Bragg and East 24th. Other ordinance requirements will be discussed at time of permit, if plans include expansion or construction. Off- street parking with access to 24th and AHTD permit for work in I-30 Right -Of -way will be required. LAND USE ELEMENT The site in question is located in the Central City District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is for Quiet Office. There is an existing 110-1" parcel to the north and since these lots front onto the interstate, Staff is willing to consider alternative uses. A Mixed Use classification would allow January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: A Z-5452-A (Cont.) nonresidential uses as long as they are in keeping with a single family character. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .15± acre lot from R-4 to 0-1 for an unspecified office use. The property consists of a typical residential lot occupied by a single story, frame residential structure which is in extreme disrepair. The structure has been classified as "unsafe and vacant" by the City's Housing Code Enforcement staff. The property is located at the extreme southeast perimeter of a large residential neighborhood which extends to the north and west. The I-30 Right -Of -Way abuts this property on the east and the property actually fronts on the interstate frontage Road at the Roosevelt Road exit. Across 24th Street, to the south, is a large area of nonresidential uses and zoning ranging from PCD to I-2. It is the applicant's contention that the structure is beyond the point where it is financially feasible to repair it for continued residential use. He proposes to zone it 0- 1 which would allow the property to be used for an office. Staff is unclear if the applicant proposes to convert the existing structure into an office or remove it and construct a new building. The area standards provided in the 0-1 Quiet Office district anticipate that office uses will be located in established areas of the city and in close proximity to apartments and other residential uses. Height, area and off-street parking regulations are designed to assure that office uses will be compatible with adjacent residential uses. The Central City District Land Use Plan reflects the existing use and recommends single family for the site. There is an 110-1" site one lot north of this property and since these lots front onto the interstate, staff is willing to consider alternative uses. A change in the Plan from residential to mixed use would allow nonresidential uses as long as they are in keeping with a single family character. Staff believes the 0-1 reclassification to be a reasonable request for this site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested 0-1 zoning and of an amendment to the Central City District Land Use Plan to mixed use for this site. E January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: A Z-5452-A (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had not mailed the required notices and recommended that the item be deferred to the January 2, 1996 Commission meeting. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the January 2, 1996 Commission meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstaining (Chachere). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) The applicant, Elijah Hampton, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and recommended approval of the requested 0-1 zoning and of an amendment to the Central City District Land Use Plan to Mixed Use for the site. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. The vote also approved the Land Use Plan Amendment. 3 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO • 1 Z-591-A - Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Randall Smyly Rett Tucker 4942 West Markham Street Rezone from 0-3 to C-3 Unspecified commercial/retail development .54± acres Two-story office building SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Multifamily dwellings; zoned R-3 and R-5 South - War Memorial Park; zoned R-2 East - Single -Family Dwelling; zoned 0-3 West - Restaurant and Parking Lot; zoned C-3 and R-3 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Dedicate 10 feet of right-of-way on North Jackson to bring to one half of commercial street right-of-way standard. Dedicate right-of-way on West Markham so that property line is 35 feet from centerline. Dedicate a 20 foot radial area at intersection. With construction: Widening of North Jackson to 18 feet from centerline and the reconstruction of the street turning radius to 31.5 feet and a review of access to either street and the impact on the traffic will be necessary. Improvements on Markham could be requested. Sidewalks will need to be brought into conformance with ordinances. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Heights/Hillcrest District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Office. The request is for Commercial zoning. The City has consistently rejected changing the office corridor along Markham. Staff cannot recommend changing city policy at this time. January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 1 Z-591-A (Cont.) TAFF ANALYSI The request is to rezone this property, totaling .54± acres, from 110-3" General Office to "C-3" General Commercial. The property currently contains a two-story brick office building and approximately 40 space parking lot. No specific development has been proposed for the site. The property is located on the southern edge of the large Hillcrest residential neighborhood. Along the north side of Markham Street, in this area, uses and zoning range from single family homes zoned R-3 to convenience stores zoned C-4. War Memorial Park is located across Markham Street to the south. Although the uses in the area are somewhat varied, the commercial zoning is for the most part clustered in a small node on the north side of Markham, one block either side of Van Buren. Staff does not support extending the commercial zoning east of Jackson Street. The Wendy's restaurant site, located two lots east of this property, was zoned C-3 after a protracted legal battle resulting in an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling. The Heights/Hillcrest District Land Use Plan recommends office for properties on the north side of Markham, east of Jackson and west of Cedar Street. The City has consistently supported maintaining this portion of Markham Street as an office corridor. Staff cannot support a change to accommodate this proposed commercial zoning. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) The applicant, Rett Tucker, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and recommended denial of the requested C-3 zoning. Mr. Tucker addressed the Commission. He requested that the item be deferred to the January 30, 1996 Commission meeting. Mr. Tucker stated that he wished to amend the application to a PD-C. A motion was made to defer the item to the January 30, 1996 Commission meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 abstaining (Daniel). K January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-3673-B Owner: Carmo, Inc. Applicant: Christopher McKinney Location: 10100 Mabelvale Pike Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-4 Purpose: To make the existing use conforming and allow the construction of mini -storage facility. Size: 1.98± acres Existing Use: The first 100± feet nearest Mabelvale Pike is occupied by a nonconforming auto paint and body shop. The remainder of the 700± foot deep tract is wooded and undeveloped. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family South - Single -Family East - Single -Family West - Single -Family ENGINEERING COMMENTS residence; zoned R-2 residence; zoned R-2 residence; zoned R-2 residence; zoned R-2 Mabelvale Pike is a minor arterial according to the Master Street Plan and the right-of-way required is 90 feet (45 feet from centerline). Dedicate an additional 15 feet of right-of-way. The present street width is 10.5 feet from centerline and there is open ditches without a sidewalk. With construction: Construct proper drive and parking. Contribute in -lieu contribution equal to 15% of the cost of improvements or the cost of widening the road to 30 feet from the centerline with sidewalk. A grading permit may be required with construction. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Geyer Springs West District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family. The request January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-3673-B (Cont.) is for Commercial. The majority of the area is Single Family and to change to Commercial in this location would lead to Strip Commercial along Mabelvale Pike. Staff cannot recommend changing the adopted Plan at this time. TAFF ANALYSI The request is to rezone this 1.98± acre tract from "R-211 Single Family residential to "C-4" Open Display Commercial. A nonconforming auto paint and body shop occupies the portion of the site adjacent to Mabelvale Pike. The remainder of the property is wooded and undeveloped. The applicant requests C-4 zoning to make the existing use conforming and to allow for the future construction of a mini -storage facility on the site. The property is located in an established residential neighborhood. All properties in the immediate vicinity are zoned R-2 and occupied by single family homes. Allowing the proposed C-4 zoning would have a detrimental effect on the adjacent residential properties. The Geyer Springs West District Land Use Plan recommends Single Family for this site. A small commercial node is recognized farther south of this property, at the intersection of Mabelvale Pike and Mabelvale Main. Allowing commercial at this site could potentially lead to stripping Mabelvale Pike with Commercial zoning. Staff cannot support changing the Plan to accommodate the proposed Commercial zoning. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-4 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) David Henry was present representing the applicant. There were numerous objectors present. Letters and a petition objecting to the rezoning had been presented to the Commission. Staff presented the item and recommended denial of the requested C-4 zoning. Mr. Henry addressed the Commission and asked that the item be deferred to allow for further review of the Land Use Plan. He stated that the applicant desired to rezone the property to accommodate the construction of a building to house a cabinet shop. Mr. Henry suggested that the application might be amended to provide an OS zoned buffer. 0a January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-3673-B (Cont.) Acting Chairman Ball asked Mr. Henry if the proposed use was not a mini -storage business. Mr. Henry responded that mini - storage was originally proposed but that the applicant now wanted to build a cabinet manufacturing business behind the existing body shop. In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mr. Henry stated that there had been nonconforming businesses in the building since the property's annexation into the City. Charlie Staggs, of 9990 Mabelvale Pike, spoke in opposition to the C-4 zoning. He asked the Commission to keep the property zoned R-2. Acting Chairman Ball asked Mr. Staggs if there was room for discussion about alternative uses for the property. Mr. Staggs responded that he did not believe so. Commissioner McCarthy urged the neighbors to meet with the applicant. Elizabeth Peel, of 10010 Mabelvale Pike, spoke at length in opposition to the C-4 zoning. She questioned why the applicant had changed the proposed use from mini -storage to a cabinet shop. Ms. Peel then stated that the applicant had parked vehicles in front of the rezoning sign to block persons from seeing it. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, Dana Carney of the Planning Staff, discussed the effect of nonconformity and its limits on the use of the site. David Henry again stated that the applicant desired a deferral to allow an opportunity to address some concerns which had been raised by the neighbors. George Niblock, of 9901 Mabelvale Pike, addressed the Commission in opposition to the C-4 zoning. In response to a statement by Mr. Niblock, Mr. Henry stated that he wanted to get involved with his client and the neighborhood to see what could collectively be developed to improve the site. Commissioner Adcock then made a motion to defer the item to the February 13, 1996 Commission meeting with the understanding that the two parties meet to discuss the proposal. Mr. Henry asked about deferring the item for a longer time. Mr. Carney responded that there was a possibility of the Commission changing its meeting date and time. He stated that the item should be deferred no longer than the next scheduled rezoning hearing which was February 13, 1996. Mr. Henry stated that he intended to meet with the neighbors and hoped to have the issues resolved by February 13, 1996. If 3 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 2 Z-3673-B (Cont. that is not possible, Mr. Henry stated that an additional deferral might be necessary. Commissioner Brandon stated that it was important that those persons present be made aware of any meeting. Commissioner Putnam briefly discussed the nonconforming status of the site. He stated that he agreed with the deferral but urged Mr. Henry to be prepared to discuss the nonconforming use of the site. A second was then made to the motion to defer the item. In response to a question from Mr. Niblock, Mr. Henry stated that he would set up a meeting. John Underhill, representing his parents who live across Mabelvale Pike from the site, addressed the Commission. Mr. Underhill stated that the operators of the body shop had expressed a desire to relocate. He reminded the Commission that the issue before them was a C-4 zoning request. Ms. Peel again addressed the Commission in opposition to the C-4 zoning. Commissioner Woods stated that the applicant would probably not get the C-4 zoning. He stated that the applicant wanted a deferral to meet with the neighbors and to perhaps amend the application. Louise Winkler, of 10113 Mabelvale Pike, addressed the Commission. She stated that the body shop was parking wrecked vehicles on the site. She asked the Commission to maintain the site's nonconformity. Jerry Peel, of 10010 Mabelvale Pike, spoke in opposition to the C-4 zoning. He described problems that he had with the existing business on the site. (At this point, the Commission took a brief recess.) Theo Blacklock, of 10007 Mabelvale Pike, spoke in opposition to the rezoning request. She stated that the property had been an eyesore since the building was first constructed. Mrs. Blacklock urged the Commission to keep the property zoned R-2. Commissioner Lichty stated that he was opposed to the rezoning and to the idea of deferring the item. Commissioner McCarthy concurred. A vote was taken on the motion to defer the item to the February 13, 1996 Commission meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 ayes, 4 noes and 0 absent. 4 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6070 Owner: Guy and Beverly Wade Applicant: Guy and Beverly Wade Location: 3319 John Barrow Road Request: Rezone from R-3 to C-3 Purpose: Unspecified commercial development Size: .30± acres Existing Use: Single-family residence SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family residence; zoned C-1 South - Beauty shop and vacant lots; zoned C-3 East - Vacant lot; zoned R-3 West - Single -Family residence; zoned R-3 ENGINEERING COMMENTS The current right-of-way line is 38.27 feet from the centerline of John Barrow, Master Street Plan Right -of -Way is 45 feet from centerline. Dedicate additional right-of- way or seek a waiver from the Board of Directors. West 34th Street right-of-way is currently 40 feet. Commercial streets require 60 feet, dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of-way. With Construction: Provide adequate off-street parking and drives per ordinances. This lot is too close to intersection to permit a drive location onto Barrow Road. The new driveby ordinance is to be 100 feet from Barrow Road. Construct sidewalk and ramps for 34th Street. Street improvements for 34th to commercial street standards will be required. Existing street is a 21 foot chipseal and should be 36 foot curb and gutter. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Boyle Park District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Low Density Multifamily. The request is for Commercial use. Staff agrees that the land use plan should be reviewed in this location. A January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6070 (Cont.) neighborhood planning committee has been working to develop a policy plan for the area, and staff would like to work with this committee to determine how the plan should be amended. STAFF ANALYSIS The request is to rezone this property from "R-311 Single - Family residential to "C-3" General Commercial. The property consists of one single family residence occupying two lots. No specific use has been proposed by the applicant. The property is the only one on the east side of Barrow Road, between 32nd and 36th Streets, which is not zoned commercial. Adjacent property to the north is zoned C-1 and properties across 34th Street to the south are zoned C-3. It would appear that allowing some nonresidential use of the property would be reasonable. The Boyle Park District Land Use Plan currently recommends low density multifamily for the site. The Plan does not recognize much of the commercial zoning along Barrow Road, between 33rd and 36th Streets. Staff feels that the Plan should be reviewed in this area. A neighborhood planning committee has been working to develop a policy for the area. Staff would like to work with this committee to determine how the Plan should be amended. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that this item be deferred to the February 13, 1995 Commission meeting to allow for further review of the Boyle Park District Land Use Plan in this area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and recommended that the item be deferred to the February 13, 1996 Commission meeting to allow for further review of the Boyle Park District Land Use Plan. It was noted that the applicant had agreed to the deferral. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the February 13, 1996 Commission meeting with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 2 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 4 Z-6076 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Estate of Herman B. Page and Ethel E. Page Ramona Ball 3800 Baseline Road Rezone from R-2 to C-1 Unspecified commercial development .64± acres Single-family residence SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family residence; zoned R-2 South - Single -Family residence and nonconforming veterinary clinic; zoned R-2 East - Nonconforming auto repair garage; zoned R-2 West - Vacant lot; zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS The right-of-way for Community Road is not shown, 30 feet of right-of-way from centerline is required for commercial streets. Baseline Road requires 45 feet from centerline with a 20 foot radial dedication at the intersection. With Construction: Provide adequate off-street parking and drives per ordinances. The existing drive will be acceptable as shown on Baseline Road. A new drive onto Community by ordinance is to be 100 feet from Baseline Road. Construct sidewalk and ramps for Community Road. Street improvements for Community Road will be required to commercial street standards. Existing street is a 18 foot chipseal and should be 36 foot curb and gutter. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Geyer Springs East District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Residential. The request is for Commercial use. After review of the area, Staff believes it is appropriate to amend the Plan to allow January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 4 Z-6076 (Cont.) Office use in the area. Currently, there is an Office use area to the west. This use pattern should be continued east to Community Road for the first 200 feet north of Baseline Road. STAFF ANALYSIS The request is to rezone this .64± acre tract from "R-21, Single Family residential to "C-1" Neighborhood Commercial. The property currently contains a one-story, single family residence. No specific development has been proposed for the site. The property is located in an area that is predominately zoned R-2. The properties in the immediate vicinity contain uses ranging from single-family homes to nonconforming businesses such as an auto repair garage and a veterinary clinic. An elementary school and a neighborhood alert center are located diagonally across Baseline Road to the southeast. A large area of undeveloped 0-3 property is located approximately 400 feet west of the site. Much of Baseline Road has developed nonresidentially and staff believes it is appropriate to consider a nonresidential use for this property. There is single family residential property adjacent to the north of this site and staff questions whether commercial zoning is appropriate. Office zoning may be more compatible with the adjacent residential use. The Geyer Springs East District Land Use Plan currently recommends Mixed Residential for this site. After review of the area, staff believes it is appropriate to amend the Plan to Office. This can be accomplished by expanding the existing Office which is to the west of this site. The Office pattern should be extended east to Community Road for the first 200 feet north of Baseline Road. No specific development or use is proposed for the site. The property is in the estate of Herman and Ethel Page. The family desires to sell the property and is seeking a higher classification to facilitate a sale. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-1 zoning. Staff recommends that the property be zoned 0-3 and that the Geyer Springs East District Land Use Plan be amended to Office. E January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 4 z-6076 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) The applicant, Ramona Ball, was present. There was one objector present. Staff presented the item and recommended denial of the requested C-1 zoning. Staff recommended that the property be zoned 0-3 and that the Geyer Springs East District Land Use Plan be amended to Office for this site. Ms. Ball addressed the Commission in support of her application. She stated that the property was in her parents' estate and that the heirs wanted to dispose of it. Ms. Ball stated that it was difficult to keep the home rented due to the house's close proximity to Baseline Road. Ms. Ball made note of the many non-residential uses along this portion of Baseline Road. She stated that a business would be a more preferable use of the property than a boarded up house. Larry Daniel, of 8806 Community Road, addressed the Commission. He stated that he lived adjacent to the site and that he was opposed to the proposed C-1 zoning. Mr. Daniel stated he was not opposed to 0-3 zoning. Milton Anderson, of 8722 Community Road, spoke in support of the C-1 zoning. He presented a letter from the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association which urged approval of the commercial zoning request. In response to a question from Commissioner Chachere, staff stated that there were very few single family residences left on the north side of Baseline Road. In response to a question from Acting Chairman Ball, Ms. Ball stated that no particular use was proposed for the site. She stated that she felt the site was not an appropriate office location and she again described other commercial uses in the area. Commissioner Adcock asked if C-2 was an appropriate zoning for the site. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the C-2 Shopping Center District required a minimum site area of 5 acres. In response to a question from Commissioner Lichty, Ms. Ball stated that she had reviewed the list of allowable uses in the 0-3 district but that she felt the C-1 district allowed more uses that would facilitate a sale of the property. Commissioner Lichty noted that the 0-3 district allows uses other than offices. Commissioner Hawn stated that he was effect of the zoning on the neighbor property. He noted that the neighbor concerned about the adjacent to Ms. Ball's had agreed to 0-3 3 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 4 Z-6076 (Con zoning. Ms. Ball responded that she did not want to do anything detrimental to the neighbor. Acting Chairman Ball told Ms. Ball that the Commission seemed to be expressing concern about the C-1 zoning and offered her the opportunity to amend the application. Commissioner Putnam stated that 0-3 zoning was not feasible for this site. He stated that he felt the proposed C-1 zoning would not impact the neighborhood. Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, urged the Commission to adhere to the Land Use Plan and to deny the requested commercial zoning. Commissioner Lichty stated that he could not support commercial zoning for the site, not knowing what the proposed use might be. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Cindy Dawson of the City Attorney's Office stated that the applicant could offer to restrict the list of permitted uses within a particular zoning classification. Acting Chairman Ball then offered Ms. Ball the opportunity to either amend the application or accept a vote on the C-1 request. Ms. Ball stated that she was amending her application to 0-3. Commissioner Rahman reminded Ms. Ball that she could come back to the Commission with a planned development application if a particular commercial use is proposed for the site. A motion was made to approve the application as amended to 0-3. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. The vote also approved an amendment to the Geyer Springs East District Land Use Plan to Office for this site. 4 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 5 Z-6083 Owner: John L. Burnett, Trustee Applicant: J. E. Hathaway, Jr. Location: East side of Cooper Orbit Road, north of Spring Valley Manor Request: Rezone from R-2 to MF-18 Purpose: Development of apartment project Size: 31± acres Existing Use: vacant, wooded property SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Undeveloped woodland; zoned R-2 South - Single -Family homes; zoned R-2 East - Undeveloped woodland; zoned R-2 West - Undeveloped woodland; zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Cooper Orbit is a collector and dedication of right-of-way to the horizontal curvature and tangent distance set forth in the Master Street Plan is required. Those requirements are 450 foot horizontal curves with 200 foot tangent distances between curves. With construction: One half street improvements to frontage with sidewalks to collector street standards. Base flood information will be required with grading and excavation permits. Stormwater detention analysis will be required. Other ordinance requirements will be noted at time of permits. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Ellis Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family. The request is for Multifamily use. Though the site is along a collector, Staff cannot at this time support a density increase in this location. January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 5 Z-6083 (Cont.) STAFF ANALYSIS The request is to rezone this 31± acre tract from "R-2" Single Family residential to "MF-18" Multifamily residential. The property is wooded and undeveloped and the terrain is fairly rugged. No specific multifamily development has been proposed. MF-18 zoning would allow multifamily residential structures not to exceed 18 units per gross acre. The property is outside of but adjacent to the western city limits. It is within the City's extraterritorial zoning and subdivision jurisdiction. Most of the property in the immediate vicinity is wooded and undeveloped although a single family residential subdivision is adjacent to the south. No specific development has been proposed and staff questions the wisdom of such a density increase for this site. The Ellis Mountain District Land Use Plan recommends single family for the site. A single family residential neighborhood is adjacent to the south. A substantial realignment of Cooper Orbit Road is required to conform to the Master Street Plan. Staff doubts the terrain could support a development of the density proposed. Staff believes it would be more appropriate for the applicant to approach the Commission with a specific developmental proposal which might address these concerns. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested MF-18 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) James Hathaway was present representing the application. There were two objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had requested that the item be deferred to the March 12, 1996 Subdivision Hearing to allow him an opportunity to address those issues raised by Staff. It was noted that the request for deferral was not received 5 working days prior to the public hearing and that a waiver of the Bylaws would be required. Jamie Brown, of 11 Manor Circle, and Wayne Elkins, of 12 Vista Drive, each expressed opposition to the proposed multifamily zoning. Mr. Elkins stated that he was concerned 2 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO-:_ 5 Z-6083 (Con about protracted deferrals "wearing down the opposition." Each stated that they were not opposed to this deferral. A motion was made to waive the Bylaws. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. A motion was made to defer the item to the March 12, 1996 Commission meeting. The motion was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 3 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 6 Z-6084 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Harry T. Fuller and Walter Isgrig Pete Hornibrook Northeast corner of West 36th Street and S. Shackleford Road Rezone from R-2 to C-3 Unspecified commercial development 11.9± acres Vacant, wooded land SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Undeveloped woodland; zoned MF-12 South - Vacant land; zoned R-2 East - Our Way Living Center; zoned R-2 West - Vacant lot, zoned C-3; Vacant Commercial Building, zoned C-4; Nonconforming Office -Warehouse Complex, zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS 36th and Shackleford Road are minor arterials with 45 feet of right-of-way from centerline required. 36th will require a right -turn lane, therefore, additional 12 feet of ROW required for this right -turn lane. With construction: 30 foot of pavement required from centerline of Shackleford Road with a sidewalk. 30 feet of pavement and the right - turn lane are required for 36th Street. The right -turn lane is to have 150 feet of stacking space and a 100 foot taper, see page 12 of the master street plan. A sidewalk is also required. Stormwater detention analysis will be required. A grading permit shall be obtained prior to construction. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the I-430 District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Public Institutional use. The request January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 6 Z-6084 (Cont.) is for Commercial use. while staff is willing to consider alternative land uses to Public, Commercial is not appropriate at this time. Multifamily would appear to be a more appropriate change of use. STAFF ANALYSIS The request is to rezone this 11.9± acre tract from "R-211 Single Family residential to "C-3" General Commercial. The property is currently undeveloped and wooded. No specific commercial development has been proposed. The zoning pattern in the area is varied, ranging from R-2 to C-4. Uses in the immediate vicinity are mixed, including such uses as single -wide mobile homes, vacant commercial buildings, churches and an office warehouse complex. Although there are a variety of nonresidential uses in the area, the commercial zoning has been restricted to the west side of Shackleford Road. A small cluster of commercial properties is located at the northwest corner of 36th and Shackleford. The proposed Summit Mall PCD is also located on the west side of Shackleford Road, northwest of this site. East of Shackleford Road the area takes on a more residential character. Uses to the east include the Our way residential living center, single family homes and churches which are permitted in residential zones with a conditional use permit. The I-430 District Land Use Plan recommends Public Institutional use for this site which is reflective of the Our way and United Cerebral Palsy sites adjacent to the east. while staff believes it is appropriate t consider alternative uses to Public/Institutional, Commercial zoning is not proper for this site. A transition zoning such as multifamily would be better to progress from the Commercial zoning on the west side of Shackleford Road to the residential uses east of the site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 2, 1996) The applicant, Pete Hornibrook, was present. There were no objectors present. One letter supporting the commercial zoning had been presented to the Commission. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial of the requested C-3 zoning. P" January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 6 Z-6084 (Con In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, staff noted that Shackleford Road formed a boundary between the existing commercial zoning and the residential uses which extend eastward into the John Harrow Neighborhood. Staff also noted that no specific use had been proposed for the site; that the request was for C-3 zoning directly adjacent to a residential development. Commissioner Daniel stated that he was opposed to multifamily on this site but that he could support commercial development if it provided needed services to the residents of the Our Way complex adjacent to the east. He stated that he could not support C-3 zoning with no specific development being proposed. Mr. Hornibrook addressed the Commission in support of his application. He presented a map of the area and noted other commercial properties in the area. Mr. Hornibrook made reference to the letter from the executive director of United Cerebral Palsy voicing support for the commercial rezoning. Mr. Hornibrook stated that it was appropriate to zone the site C-3 which would allow for the development of a strip commercial center. He then listed several neighborhood service type uses which might go in such a center. Commissioner Woods asked if those same uses might not also go in if the property were zoned C-2. Mr. Hornibrook responded that they would. He stated that he had no problem with amending the application to C-2 and coming back to the Commission with a site plan. Commissioner Woods stated that he supported some type of commercial development at this location but that he wanted to see a specific development rather than a straight C-3 rezoning. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Hornibrook if he had any discussions with the people at United Cerebral Palsy about potential development of the site. Mr. Hornibrook responded that he had discussed development of the site as a strip shopping center containing such uses as a cleaners, pharmacy and grocery store. Commissioner Hawn asked Staff how long it had been since the Land Use Plan had been reviewed in this area. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the Land Use Plan in this area had been reviewed very recently due to other rezoning requests in the area. Commissioner Hawn stated that he felt it was important to stick to the plan unless there is a compelling and overriding reason that the Plan needs to be revised. Mr. Hornibrook responded that the Plan is not set in stone and that it should be used as a guideline. 3 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 6 Z-6084 (Cont.) Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, made reference to the letter which had been sent by United Cerebral Palsy. In that letter, he noted, OCP voiced support for development of a "neighborhood shopping facility that would be an enhancement to individuals residing in this area." Mr. Lawson noted that the application was for C-3 zoning, not C-1 zoning which would accommodate a neighborhood shopping facility. He noted the difference in uses allowed in the two zones. Mr. Lawson noted the vacant commercial property across Shackleford Road and the relationship of this site to adjacent residential properties. Commissioner Putnam noted that Mr. Hornibrook had stated he would accept C-2 zoning which requires site plan review. Mr. Lawson responded that C-2 does have site plan review but that it does not control the uses. Mr. Lawson stated that C-1, C-2 and C-3 zonings are appropriate when the Plan indicates so; but that in some cases, a more sensitive approach must be taken. Mr. Hornibrook and Mr. Lawson then discussed the relationship of the site to residential properties in the area. Mr. Hornibrook stated that he would be willing to amend his application to either C-2 or C-1. Acting Chairman Ball then confirmed with Mr. Hornibrook that the application had been amended to C-2. In response to a question from Commissioner woods, Mr. Hornibrook stated that he did not have a plan to submit as a planned development and asked the Commission to approve the requested C-2 zoning. In response to a question from the Commission, Staff noted that the Kensington Place and John Barrow Neighborhood Associations had been notified of the C-3 zoning request. No opposition to the request had been received. After a discussion of the various uses allowed in C-2 and C-3, Commissioner Lichty stated that it was not the Commission's responsibility to guarantee an applicant a profit. There was then further discussion of the appropriateness of zoning the site C-2 with site plan review. Mr. Lawson then reiterated that the C-2 site plan review required conformity with minimum standards only. 4 January 2, 1996 ITEM NO.: 6 Z-6084 (Cont.) Acting Chairman Ball then brought the item to a vote as amended to C-2. The vote was 0 ayes, 10 noes, 0 absent and 1 abstaining (Putnam). The request was denied. 5 r� w� 0 a P-A cn [o z w m a Q' w Q z o I January 2, 1996 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 12:06 p.m. Date Z - _/