pc_11 13 1997LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
REZONING HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
NOVEMBER 13, 1997
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being nine (9) in number.
II. Members Present: Craig Berry
Herb Hawn
Bill Putnam
Suzanne McCarthy
Doyle Daniel
Hugh Earnest
Larry Lichty
Sissi Brandon
Pam Adcock
Members Absent: Ron Woods
Mizan Rahman
City Attorney: None Present
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
REZONING AND PLANNING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 13, 1997
4:00 P.M.
I. DEFERRED ITEMS
A.
Z-6386
6106 Fourche Dam Pike
R-2 to C-3
B.
Land Use Plan Amendment - Text and
Definition Change
C.
Central High
Vision Framework
II. REZONING ITEMS
1.
Z -4270-A
8001 Stagecoach
R-2 to C-3
2.
Z -4933-A
15701 Chenal Parkway
PCD to C-3
III. PLAN ISSUES
3. Land Use Plan Amendment - Chenal District -
16901 Cantrell
4. Land Use Plan Amendment - Geyer Springs West District -
10112 Chicot
5. Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City District -
1301 Jones
IV. OTHER MATTERS
6. Adoption of 1998 Planning Commission Calendar
7. Review of "Buffer" Definitions
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-6386
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
C. Arthur and Caroline
W. Biggs
Caroline W. Biggs
6106 Fourche Dam Pike
Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Construct neighborhood grocery
store with restaurant
1.16± acres
Vacant lot
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North - Single family; zoned R-2
South - Single family; zoned R-2
East - Levee and Fourche Creek Floodway; zoned R-2
West - Single family; zoned R-2
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
1. Fourche Dam Pike Road is listed on the MSP as a
collector, dedication of right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline of street is required.
2. With development construct half street improvements,
including sidewalks, to Fourche Dam Pike Road. Provide
street plans per MSP and site grading and drainage plans
to Bruce Kemmet, 701 West Markham, prior to
construction.
3. A grading and development permit for special flood
hazard area are required prior to construction. Contact
Steve Loop or Melvin Hall at 371-4811 for assistance.
4. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance
16,577.
5. Fourche Dam Pike Road has a 1995 average daily traffic
count of 2,500.
LAND USE ELEMENT
A request to rezone a tract of land at 6106 Fourche Dam Pike
from 'R-2' to 'C-3' was filed. Upon review of the Land Use
Plan, staff determined that the request was in conflict with
the Plan and was a major change in use. As a result a Land
Use Plan amendment has been developed for the Planning
Commission's consideration.
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6386
The request is in the Port District. The Plan recommends
Single Family use. The request is for Commercial use.
There have been no changes to the Plan in this area, since
the current Plan was adopted. The area in question is north
of Roosevelt Road, along Fourche Dam Pike and east of
Fourche Creek. This is an older single family area.
Development is a classic rural single family area. That is,
homes along a country road. The Plan recognizes the
existing development pattern and recommends maintaining it.
To the west is a large industrial area. The uses front the
runway for the Little Rock airport. Along most of the
industrial use is an open space strip (on the Plan and
zoned) to draw a line stopping the nonresidential use. To
the south is a commercial area at Roosevelt and Fourche Dam
Pike. This was historically an important intersection of
two major roads. Currently, the City classifies both roads
as collectors. The commercial services the local
neighborhood as well as the passing traffic. NOTE: After
the tornado only one commercial use remains. Most of the
nonlocal traffic travels Roosevelt. This portion of Fourche
Dam Pike is not likely to function as a major transportation
route. Fourche Dam Pike is a loop road at this location
servicing the immediate area. The uses serviced by Fourche
Dam Pike are single family and a church. This is not a
commercial or industrial area. In fact, it 'feels, like a
neighborhood street from Cooper to Roosevelt.
To change the Plan at this location to Commercial would
introduce a major change and would not be compatible with
the existing development pattern. The City has indicated
with the open space strips (plan and zone) that the
nonresidential use should remain to the west. The area is a
viable residential area; however, an introduction of
nonresidential use will likely result in the lot by lot
demise of the area.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
The site is not located on a Central Arkansas Transit Bus
Route. A special rush hour rate does extend down East
Roosevelt Road, to the south of this site.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request before the Commission is to rezone this 1.16¢
acre tract from R-2 Single Family to C-3 General Commercial.
The Port District Land Use Plan recommends Single Family for
this site. Staff has determined that the rezoning request
requires a "major" amendment to the Land Use Plan. As per
Planning Commission policy, a proposed plan amendment is
2
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6386
presented as a separate item on this agenda (item no. 3-A).
The rezoning request should be deferred until such time as a
final determination is made on the Plan Amendment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends deferral of this rezoning request until the
November 13, 1997 commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 2, 1997)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff recommended that the item be deferred to the
November 13, 1997 Commission meeting to allow for review of
a possible land use plan amendment (Item No. 3-A on this
agenda). The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and
deferred by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
After meeting with the applicant, it was agreed that this
C-3 rezoning request is to be withdrawn. The applicant will
refile as a planned development.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
The applicants were not present. There were no objectors
present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicants
had filed a Planned Development for the site, which was on
the Commission's December 18, 1997 agenda. It was
recommended that this C-3 request be withdrawn.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
withdrawal by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. (The
Planning Commission voted at its October 2, 1997 meeting to
deny the requested Land Use Plan Amendment.)
3
November 1s, 1997
ITEM NO.: B
NAME: Land Use Plan Amendment - Text and
Definition Change
LOCATION: various
REQUEST: Modification of the Mixed Land Use
Categories
SOURCE: Staff
STAFF REPORT:
Upon further review of the mixed use categories, Staff believes
clarification is needed. It was the intent of the mixed use
categories to allow straight zoning to occur for areas with these
classifications. However, this is not necessarily clear from the
definition. Staff believes the intent of the last amendment was
to prevent the more intense use, from being the sole use (only).
Almost two hundred notices were distributed for comment in July.
Three comments were returned: two supportive of the change, one
opposed to combining MOI and MOW. This information was presented
to the Plans Committee in early August. Those responding in July
as well as those on the -ordinance contact" list have been
notified of this meeting.
Two changes are proposed. One adds language to the Mixed Office
and Commercial and Mixed Commercial and Industrial categories.
The second combines the Mixed Office Industrial and Mixed Office
Warehouse categories into the Service Trades District. In the
Mixed Commercial and Industrial category the following sentence
would be added: "Acceptable uses are commercial or mixed
commercial and industrial." A similar sentence is added to the
Mixed Office and Commercial category -- "Acceptable uses are
office or mixed office and commercial./I
The definitions for MOW and MOI are the same except for switching
the words warehouse and industrial. There are only 2 areas of
MOI (Baseline between I-30 and I-430; and Stanton Road south of
I-30) and a half dozen MOW locations (several in the western
section of downtown or west of Downtown; the Bowman-Kanis area).
The new definition for these areas would be:
Services Trades District - This category provides for a
mixture of office, warehousing and industrial park
activities that primarily serve other office service or
industrial businesses. The district is intended to
allow support services to these businesses and to
provide for uses with an office component. A Planned
zoning District is required for any development not
wholly office.
November 1s, 1997
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(OCTOBER 2, 1997)
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The
issue was deferred to November 13 by unanimous vote (11 for
0 against).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval. The
issue was approved by unanimous vote (10 for 0 against).
K
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: C
NAME: Central High Neighborhood
Vision Framework
LOCATION: I-630 south to Roosevelt Rd.
Martin Luther King Jr. Dr.
west to Union Pacific R.R.
SOURCE: City Staff
STAFF REPORT:
During the past year and a half the City of Little Rock
Departments of Planning and Development and Housing and
Neighborhood programs have had the opportunity to join the
Central High Neighborhood in an unique approach to planning.
Two charettes, one held in May of 1996 and the other in June of
1997, brought together neighborhood residents and representatives
from public and private entities with a vested interest in the
area. Each of these events offered an opportunity for all
stakeholders to share their concerns, ideas and visions for the
future of the neighborhood. This information's presented in Part
I of the document entitled "Central High Neighborhood: Vision
Framework."
In response to housing concerns raised at the Charettes, Part II
of the report details the Housing and Neighborhood Programs
framework for a Homeownership Zone. This examines housing as not
just as a social opportunity, but also as an economic development
opportunity.
As redevelopment and investment occurs in the area it is
important that the elements that make the neighborhood unique are
not lost. To that end, the last section contains conceptual
urban designs which could be used to enhance and strengthen the
characteristics of the Central High Neighborhood.
Copies of the vision Framework were distributed to all
participants with attendance at both Charettes. Other
participants were notified that copies were available at the
Central High and Wright Ave. Alert Centers, and the Department of
Planning and Development. Feedback and comments to the Vision
Framework were encouraged.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 2, 1997)
At the request of the neighborhood, this item was deferred to
November 13.
2November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.)
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
Tim Polk, Director of Housing and Neighborhood Programs reviewed
the process used for the development of this Plan. Using two
charettes in 1998 and 1997 as the process, an overall vision for
the area was developed. The three Neighborhood Association,
other interested groups and City Staff participated in the
charettes. The draft "vision frame" is the completion of the
Planning and Development Department's work. Housing and
Neighborhood Program will now work with the neighborhood to
implement the Plan.
Cliff Riggs, President Central High Neighborhood Association,
stated City Staff has followed directions well and produced a
document that has value. But this is not the document the
neighborhood will produce as the Neighborhood Plan. This
document fits in the middle of the guidelines and initiatives for
the neighborhood. (Listed guidelines and initiatives). Four
guidelines or initiatives are not addressed in this document.
Due to the events surrounding the Central High anniversary, tje
residents have not had time to devote to this issue. we would
like to continue the process and use some of the information in
this report.
Commissioner Earnest was recognized. The following motion was
made: "to withdraw the resolution before us and direct Planning
and Development staff to discontinue further involvement on the
Central High vision Framework. Staff should again assist with
the development of the Plan at such time as all recognized
neighborhood associations within the area jointly request a
neighborhood plan process with an agreed to framework." (Second
Adcock) The motion was approved unanimously (10 for 0 against).
0a
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: Z -4270-A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
International Union of
Operating Engineers
William Watt
8001 Stagecoach Road
Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Develop site for pharmacy and
general offices
3.75± acres
vacant, undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North - Church and salvage yard, zoned R-2; equipment
company , zoned C-4
South - Undeveloped woodland and floodway, zoned R-2
East - I-430 right-of-way; garden center and nursery,
zoned PCD
West - Undeveloped, wooded tract, zoned C-3
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
1. Stagecoach Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way will be
required to 45 feet from centerline for this 5 lane
minor arterial.
2. Provide in -lieu contribution for street improvements for
Stagecoach Road.
3. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4. Contact the AHTD for work within the State Highway
right-of-way.
5. Highway 5 has a 1995 average daily traffic count of
7600.
6. A sketch grading and drainage plan, a special flood
hazard permit, and a special grading permit for flood
hazard areas is required. Arkansas Department of
Pollution Control and Ecology (ADPCE) and National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
should have been issued for this work.
7. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City
Ordinance.
8. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
9> Prepare letter for street lights as required by Sec. 31-
403.
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4270-A
10. Provide striping and signage plans for the development,
for Traffic Engineering approval.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
The site is not located on a Central Arkansas Transit Bus
Route.
LAND USE ELEMENT
The site is in the Otter Creek District. The Plan
recommends Mixed Commercial Industrial use. The commercial
use is consistent with the Plan.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request before the Commission is to rezone this 3.75±
acre tract from "R-2" Single Family to "C-3" General
Commercial. The property is currently undeveloped and
partially wooded. Once rezoned, the applicant proposes to
develop the site with uses including a pharmacy and general
offices. The property is located at the southwest corner of
Stagecoach Road and I-430 with Stagecoach forming the
northern boundary and the interstate abutting the eastern
perimeter.
Uses in the area range from large tracts of undeveloped
property to a salvage yard, a church and a garden center.
There are other, smaller nonresidential uses scattered
around this freeway interchange. The site is bounded on the
west by a similarly sized tract of undeveloped C-3 property.
An undevelopable floodway is located south of the site. The
proposed C-3 zoning is compatible with uses and zoning in
the area.
The Otter Creek District Land Use Plan recommends Mixed
Commercial/Industrial for the properties on the south side
of this portion of Stagecoach Road and Commercial for the
properties on the north side. The floodway to the south is
designated Park/Open Space by the Plan. Staff believes a
C-3 request for this site is consistent with the Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the requested
being consistent with the Land Use Plan and
zoning and uses in the area.
2
C-3 zoning as
compatible with
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4270-A
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.
The Commission was informed that the required notices had
not been sent in a timely manner. It was noted that only
three property owners were within 200 feet of the site; the
City of Little Rock, the applicant (who also owns additional
property in the area) and Carter Oil Company. Carter Oil
Company had provided a signed affidavit waiving the 15 day
notice and stating that they did not object to the rezoning.
A motion was made to waive the bylaws and accept the
notices. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
The rezoning request was placed on the Consent Agenda and
approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
3
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z -4933-F
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Eugene M. Pfeifer, III
James E. Hathaway, Jr.
15701 Chenal Parkway
Rezone from PCD to C-3
Future retail development
1.09± acres
Vacant, wooded tract
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North - Chenal Parkway Right-of-way and undeveloped/
wooded tracts zoned 0-3 and C-2
South - One Source Warehouse and Lumber yard, zoned PCD
East - Construction office and contractor's storage
yard, zoned R-2
West - One Source Warehouse and Lumber Yard, zoned PCD
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
Below is the result of discussion with the developer and
Board of Directors action:
1. Ordinance 17,009 gives the developer permission to
install a drive onto the new north -south arterial and
establishes a procedure for when this drive would need
to be removed.
2. The Board of Directors determined that the $20,000
requested for contribution towards construction of the
intersection of the arterial with Chenal was not an
appropriate request. To our knowledge there was not
formal waiver but a determination that this request was
not appropriate.
3. That Public Works and the developer's engineer agreed to
an area of additional right-of-way at the northeast
corner of the lot for purposes of construction of a
right -turn lane at a future date. This right-of-way is
shown on a plat of the amended PCD prepared by White-
Daters dated 1-16-96.
4. That One Source agreed to an in -lieu for the
construction of a right -turn lane on Chenal Estimated
cost is $25 to $30 thousand dollars.
5. That the developer agreed to construct 1/2 of the length
of the arterial on the east side of the property, but
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4933-F
that the cost would not exceed 1/2 of the cost of 1/2 of
the width for the total boundary length.
6. That the Board of Directors denied the request for a
waiver of 1/2 commercial street improvements to Kanis
Road on the frontage of the property.
Additional requirements:
7. Dedication of right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline of
Kanis including a 20 feet radial dedication at the
northeast and southeast corner of property.
8. Dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline of
the new arterial to the east.
9. With development construct half street improvements
including sidewalks, for Kanis Road to collector
standards. Provide design of streets in accordance with
Master Street Plan prepared by Professional Civil
Engineer.
10. Construct 5 feet wide sidewalk including access ramps,
on the back of right-of-way of Chenal Parkway, and the
new arterial.
11. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
12. Chenal Parkway has a 1995 average daily traffic count of
11,000.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
The site is not located on a Central Arkansas Transit Bus
Route.
LAND USE ELEMENT
The site is in the Ellis Mountain District. The Plan
recommends Commercial use. There is no land use plan issue.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request before the Commission is to rezone this 1.09±
acre tract from "PCD" Planned Commercial Development to "C-
311 General Commercial. The property is currently
undeveloped and wooded. The applicant proposes unspecific
future retail development for the site once it is rezoned.
The parcel is part of the larger One Source Home Center PCD.
On December 26, 1990, Mechanics Lumber Company PCD was
approved for the 8.8± acre tract located at the southeast
corner of Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road. The PCD
established a 3 lot development with a hardware store/lumber
yard to be built on the larger of the 3 lots (Lot 1). No
uses or site plans were approved for the two smaller lots at
that time, including this subject property which was
2
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4933-F
identified as Lot 3. On December 20, 1994, Worthen Bank
Branch amended PCD was approved for Lot 2, at the corner of
Chenal and Kanis, with a bank listed as the only approved
use. On November 21, 1995, One Source Home Center amended
PCD was approved which combined the subject Lot 3 with the
larger Lot 1 to allow for expansion of the hardware
store/lumber yard and all permitted and conditional uses in
the C-3 district. On September 16, 1997, the Worthen Bank
Branch amended PCD was revoked for Lot 2 and that lot was
zoned C-3. The applicant is now requesting that this lot
(Lot 3) also be zoned C-3. This technically means the One
Source Home Center PCD will be amended to remove this 1.09±
acre tract from the PCD. This action will have the effect
of leaving the One Source Home Center on Lot 1, as it is
now. This subject property, Lot 3, can then be developed
for C-3 uses.
Staff believes the C-3 zoning request is reasonable for this
site. The Ellis Mountain District Land Use Plan recommends
Commercial for this site and the properties abutting to the
east, west and south. The Plan recommends Commercial and
Office for properties across Chenal Parkway, to the north.
The PCD zoned property to the west and south is occupied by
the One Source Home Center and Lumber Yard. A construction
company/contractor's storage yard is located to the east.
The large tracts of 0-3 and C-2 zoned properties across
Chenal Parkway are currently undeveloped and heavily wooded.
The PCD which currently covers this lot allows for all
permitted and conditional uses in the C-3 district.
Rezoning the site to C-3 will eliminate the conditional uses
as "by -right." Development of the site will have to comply
with the Chenal/Financial Centre Design Overlay District
guidelines regarding signage, lighting and utilities.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 zoning as
conforming to the Land Use Plan and being compatible with
uses and zoning in the area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
3
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 3
NAME: City Land Use Plan Amendment
Chenal Planning District
LOCATION: 16,901 Cantrell Road
REQUEST: To change an area from Single
Family to Transition
SOURCE: William J. Ormsbee
STAFF REPORT:
At the request of a property owner, a plan amendment review was
initiated. The property owner requested a Single Family area be
changed to Transition. The site is located in an unincorporated
island that is within the City's planning and zoning
jurisdiction. Planning Staff reviewed the existing land use and
zoning patterns in the area, as well as the Land Use Plan. The
south side of Cantrell is zoned R2 with the exception of two
properties just east of Katillus Road which have a POD
designation. The north side of Cantrell is zoned with an OS
strip along Cantrell and C2 zoning beyond the OS. At the
northwest corner of Katillus and Cantrell there is a gas station
with PCD zoning. The property directly west of the site
currently has a non -conforming use of a veterinary clinic.
The most recent land use amendment in the immediate area was in
April 1997. This amendment was to change an area of (SF, O) to
(PI, SO, MF) near the intersection of Chenonceau Blvd and
Cantrell.
The area in question is in a residential area on the south side
of Cantrell. With the exception of the non -conforming use at the
southeast corner of Drew and Cantrell, all the property is small
lot single family homes and large lot single family homes. Staff
feels that Transitional uses should not extend beyond the PK/OS
area. Currently, there is property available in the existing
Transition area to the east of the PK/OS that would be
appropriate for the uses the applicant is asking for.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff can not recommend a land use change from Single Family to
Transition.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
Shawn Spencer, Planner II, presented the item. Mr. Spencer
stated that there have been no letters received in opposition or
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.)
in agreement of the item. Three phone calls have been received
concerning the item. Two of the three abutting property owners
are in favor of the amendment. The third property owner is
neither in favor or against the amendment, but did ask for a
deferral until she can make a decision. Mr. Spencer reviewed the
background of the item for the Commission. The applicant,
William Ormsbee, was present.
Mr. Ormsbee stated he is currently leasing the property at the
southeast corner of Drew and Cantrell, which has a non -conforming
status. His plans are to move his business to the property
between the non -conforming use and the creek. During the last
eight and a half years he has operated a veterinary clinic at
this location and has just recently outgrown his building. Mr.
Ormsbee went into more detail about the operations of his current
business and his proposed site.
Commissioner Hawn asked staff about the status of the residential
area across from the large commercial land use area. Mr. Spencer
stated that the area of the amendment is currently an established
residential area except for the non -conforming use that the
applicant operates out of.
Commissioner Brandon asked the applicant if any waste products
from the animals would reach the creek. Mr. Ormsbee stated that
contamination of the creek would not happen.
Discussion then followed on the appropriateness of the requested
land use in a Transition area and what is allowed in Transition.
A POD would also be required in the Transition land use. Mr.
Ormsbee stated that he was aware of this requirement and had no
problems with filing a POD at the appropriate time.
Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, suggested that
the item could be deferred, so Staff could re -study the land use
amendment.
Commissioner Hawn stated that he would be in favor of deferring
the item so staff would have time to re-evaluate their
recommendation and look at a larger study area. Mr. Ormsbee said
he would have no problem deferring the item. Chairman Lichty
reminded the applicant that after the re-evaluation that staff
may not change their recommendation.
Commissioner Earnest stated that the Park/open space would serve
as a buffer between the Transition area and the Single Family
area, but the non -conforming use weakens the argument for using
the Park/open space as the line between Transition and Single
Family. He would also be in favor of deferring the item.
Commissioner Hawn made a motion to defer Item 3 until the
December 18th public hearing. Motion was seconded. Motion carried.
(8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent)
OA
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 4
NAME: Land Use Plan Amendment -
Geyer Springs West District
LOCATION: 10112 Chicot Road
REQUEST: Amend the Land Use Plan from
Multi -family to Office
SOURCE: Woody Parker, Agent
STAFF REPORT:
The property is in the Geyer Springs West District, west of
Chicot Road, south of Rebecca Lane. Submitted as a result of a
rezoning request, it is a major plan amendment. Shown on the
Plan as Multi -family, the area is currently a vacant field.
There are single family homes to the north and west of the
property. The area south of the property was once a mobile home
park which is now abandoned. There is an existing office
building directly east of the site.
Both the land use and zoning in the area are reflective of the
existing uses. The single family homes are shown as Single
Family on the Plan and zoned R-2. The vacant mobile home park is
Multi -family and zoned R-7 and the office building is shown as
Office and zoned 0-3.
The Geyer Springs West District Plan was last amended on October
2, 1997 as part of the Chicot West, I-30 South Neighborhood
Action Plan. Staff contacted the steering committee about this
amendment and committee was in favor of the change to office.
The applicant surveyed the adjacent residents who indicated they
would prefer an office development over multifamily on this
property.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Because of the close proximity of single family homes to this
site Staff recommends the amendment be from Multi -family to
Suburban Office.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
Walter Malone, Planning Manager, reviewed the area. Mr. Malone
indicated that the surrounding neighbors and the neighborhood
plan committee both agree with a change to Office. Due to the
proximity of single family homes and past experience in other
sections of Little Rock, staff recommends Suburban Office not
Office for this location.
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.)
Mr. Woody Parker, the applicant, distributed a parcel map of the
area. The ownership including the proposed office area are
delineated on the map. (This is part of a 5 acre tract.)
Mr. Parker reviewed the map and described the current uses. An
"0-3" request is made because the tract has been sold subject to
the zoning. Since there are no definite development plans, the
owner cannot rezone to "POD" at this time (as Suburban Office
requires). Request "0-3" stipulating any building which might go
in would have to meet the Suburban Office requirements.
There was discussion about timing requirements and allowing 0-3
with restrictions in a Suburban Office area.
Mr. Parker indicated that he had surveyed the surrounding owners
and they all wanted Office not Multifamily. Mr. Parker again
stated the "0-3" with condition is all right with the owner.
Commissioner Daniel asked Mr. Scherer, Civil Engineer Manager
about access. There was discussion about access review, which
would be done if a site plan or plat were filed.
Commissioner Putnam asked about Suburban Office land use with a
restricted "0-3" zone. There was discussion about requiring site
plan and height limits. The issue of Suburban Office requirement
of the PUD process was discussed and meeting the spirit versus
the letter of Suburban Office. Commissioner Adcock stated a
Suburban Office change should be made followed by a conditioned
"0-3" request.
Commissioner Hawn moved the Plan be changed to Suburban Office in
this location (Adcock second). Commissioner Putnam asked about a
buffer on the west end of the site. There was discussion about
buffering. Mr. Parker agreed to the Suburban Office change. The
motion was approved (10 for 0 against).
2
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 5
NAME: Land Use Plan Amendment -
Central City District
LOCATION: 1301 Jones Street
REQUEST: Amend the Land Use Plan from
Single Family to Neighborhood
Commercial
SOURCE: Charles Gaines
STAFF REPORT:
The site, at the southeast corner of Jones and 13th Street, has
been submitted for a rezoning. Shown on the Land Use Plan as
Single Family, an amendment to Neighborhood Commercial would be
a major plan amendment. It has been over a year since a plan
amendment has been approved in this district.
Built as a single family home, the building is currently vacant.
immediately surrounding the site are single family homes. The
athletic field of Central High School is one block south. One
block north of the site on 12th street is an existing small
commercial node with an auto parts store, drapery cleaner,
restaurant and hair salon. The railroad runs one block west of
the property.
The single family homes in the area are shown as Single Family on
the plan and zoned R-3 Single Family and R-4 Two Family. There
is C-3 General Commercial and I-2 Light Industrial zoning at the
commercial node to the north. The commercial area on 12th street
provides opportunities for retail and services in the area on a
collector street. This area, one block to the south, was
developed and remains as a residential neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the amendment from Single Family to
Neighborhood Commercial.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
Walter Malone, Planning Manager, identified the location of the
request. Mr. Malone stated there is Commercial and Industrial
land within a block in two directions. Staff is concerned that a
change at this site would result in a multi -block change from
Single Family to Commercial. Therefore, staff is not in support
of a change at this time.
l
November 1.3 , 1997
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.)
Mr. Charles Gaines, owner, stated he wished to erect a small
family business on this site. The existing house would be
removed. The resulting structure would be compatible with the
neighborhood. The use would be a barber shop.
Mr. Riggs, President Central High Association, stated he was
against the request in part due to the removal of the structure
(house). The neighborhood has concerns about the lose of housing
stock and shifting the commercial from 12th Street to 13th
Street. In the long run this change would prevent the
rehabilitation of neighboring homes.
Mrs. Victoria Gaines asked to speak. She indicated they lived
next door. The business would be an asset to the neighborhood.
Due to the costs of rehabilitating the existing structure, it is
more desirable to start with a new structure.
Commissioner Brandon indicated the new commercial building would
help the visual impact, however the intrusion of nonresidential
could hurt the other structures. There was discussion about the
family ownership and surrounding commercial use.
Commissioner Hawn raised the issue of PUD and not changing the
Land Use Plan. Commissioner Hawn moved to amend the Land Use
Plan as requested.
There was discussion about using the existing structure,
requiring a PUD, and site design -- Neighborhood Commercial PUD
required. Study of Home Occupation status was discussed. The
motion was denied by a vote of (0 for 8 against, 2 abstention -
Putnam Brandon).
Staff indicated the owner can file either a rezoning or a Planned
Development if they wished.
K
PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR 1998
SUBDIVISION HEARINGS:
ADOPTED: November 13, 1997
AMENDED:
AVAILABLE INFORMAL MEETING DATES:
(to be scheduled as required)
Meeting Date (5)
01-22-98
03-05-98
04-16-98
05-28-98
07-09-98
08-20-98
10-01-98
11-12-98
01-07-99
NOTE: (1) All public Hearings shall be held at 4:00 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the
Commission.
(2) All meetings shall be held at 1:00 P.M. unless changed by the Subdivision
Committee.
(3) An agenda meeting will be held prior to each public hearing date and to begin at 3:30
P.M. in the Sister Cities Conference Room.
(4) No agenda meeting these dates.
(5) All informal meetings shall be held at 3:30 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the
Commission.
(6) All meetings shall be held at 11:00 A.M. unless otherwise changed by the Plans
Committee.
NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON
REQUEST. REQUEST SHOULD BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO
THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE.
Subdivision
Filing Date
Legal Ad
Committee (2)
Hearing Date (1) (3)
12-22-97
01-02-98
01-15-98
02-05-98
02-09-98
02-20-98
02-26-98
03-19-98
03-23-98
04-03-98
04-09-98
04-30-98
05-04-98
05-15-98
05-21-98
06-11-98(4)
06-15-98
06-26-98
07-02-98
07-23-98
07-27-98
08-07-98
08-13-98
09-03-98
09-08-98
09-18-98
09-24-98
10-15-98
10-19-98
10-30-98
11-05-98
12-03-98
12-07-98
12-18-98
12-30-98
01-21-99
PLANNING & REZONING HEARINGS:
Filing Date
Legal Ad
Plans Committee(6)
Hearing Date (1) (3)
11-17-97
11-28-97
12-01-97
12-15-97
01-08-98(4)
01-12-98
01-23-98
01-26-98
02-09-98
02-19-98
02-23-98
03-06-98
03-09-98
03-23-98
04-02-98
04-06-98
04-17-98
04-20-98
05-04-98
05-14-98(4)
05-18-98
05-29-98
06-01-98
06-15-98
06-25-98
06-29-98
07-10-98
07-13-98
07-27-98
08-06-98
08-10-98
08-21-98
08-24-98
09-14-98
09-17-98
09-21-98
10-02-98
10-05-98
10-19-98
10-29-98
11-02-98
11-13-98
11-16-98
11-30-98
12-17-98
12-21-98
01-08-99
01-04-99
01-18-99
02-04-99
AVAILABLE INFORMAL MEETING DATES:
(to be scheduled as required)
Meeting Date (5)
01-22-98
03-05-98
04-16-98
05-28-98
07-09-98
08-20-98
10-01-98
11-12-98
01-07-99
NOTE: (1) All public Hearings shall be held at 4:00 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the
Commission.
(2) All meetings shall be held at 1:00 P.M. unless changed by the Subdivision
Committee.
(3) An agenda meeting will be held prior to each public hearing date and to begin at 3:30
P.M. in the Sister Cities Conference Room.
(4) No agenda meeting these dates.
(5) All informal meetings shall be held at 3:30 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the
Commission.
(6) All meetings shall be held at 11:00 A.M. unless otherwise changed by the Plans
Committee.
NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON
REQUEST. REQUEST SHOULD BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO
THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE.
November 13, 1997
ITEM NO.: 7
TITLE: Briefing on Buffer Definitions
STAFF REPORT:
This item is intended to help clarify the term "buffer" and how
it may be used under current ordinances.
Staff will review the various definitions of "Buffer" from the
City Code.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 13, 1997)
Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, spoke and gave
a brief overview of the issue. Mr. Lawson discussed the buffer
issue that had occurred adjacent to the Birchwood neighborhood
and he said that it pointed out that people are unclear about the
definitions of buffer and open space. Mr. Lawson went on to
describe the OS Open Space zoning district and said the city has
zoned land OS for buffers. Mr. Lawson then told the Commission
that the definition of buffer does not mean it cannot be
undisturbed. Mr. Lawson said that the city needs to be more
careful how the different terms are used, but staff feels that
there is nothing wrong with the definitions and they do not need
to be changed. Mr. Lawson said the staff's position was
discussed with the Plans Committee. Mr. Lawson made some
additional comments and said the Commission might consider
reducing the 50 foot minimum requirement for OS. Mr. Lawson
concluded by saying that the City regrets that was a
misunderstanding in the Birchwood neighborhood, but it has been
resolved.
Chairman Larry Lichty spoke and said that the misunderstanding
came about as the result of a retaining wall structure being
placed in the buffer area. Chairman Lichty said the construction
of the retaining wall created the confusion over the buffer area.
Chairman Lichty said that when the Commission reviews a buffer,
the intent is for the area to be undisturbed.
Commissioner Herb Hawn made some comments and said the Birchwood
problem was created by the placement of a functional structure
instead of a buffering structure.
Commissioner Bill Putnam spoke and described the Birchwood
situation as an atrocious act and said undisturbed means
undisturbed.
Commissioner Hawn read a definition of buffer and suggested that
the Commission needed to state what they mean when different
terms are used.
November 15, 1997
ITEM NO • 7 (Cont.)
I
Commissioner Doyle Daniel then asked staff whether the court
order was the primary cause of the problem because the language
was very vague. Jim Lawson stated that was correct.
Commissioner Daniel made additional comments about the court
order and the problems that it caused.
Jim Lawson then said the court used the word "buffer so the
City used the ordinance definition of buffer. Mr. Lawson said,
in 1984, the neighborhood thought buffer meant undisturbed, but
the court order was not written that way. Mr. Lawson told the
Commission that the City needs to be very clear about what is
meant by buffer and everybody is on the same page when
undisturbed and buffer are used.
Commissioner Pam Adcock questioned whether it would be easier to
state that buffer means undisturbed and any changes would have to
be reviewed by the Planning Commission.
Jim Lawson responded and said that some developments never go
before the Commission and it would cause problems to bring
everything to the Commission.
Discussion continued on the issue requiring buffers to be
undisturbed and modifications would come before the Planning
Commission. Commissioner Adcock stated that it would be easier
if everybody just used one word, one term.
Jim Lawson said that staff will need to make sure that the type
of buffer is clarified for the record when an applicant makes
reference to buffer or undisturbed. This should ensure that all
interested parties have a clear understanding of what will take
place in the buffer area.
Commissioner Hugh Earnest told the Commission that the Plans
Committee discussed the buffer issue at their last meeting.
Commissioner Earnest then commented on the existing definitions
and how it provides for some flexibility to allow needed
plantings or landscaping.
Additional comments were offered by several commissioners.
The Planning Commission took no formal action on this discussion
item.
2
0
cc:
0
C-)
LLJ
LU
I--
0
Z
0
C!n
0
z
E
z
CL
tZi
N�
n.
ME
�0-
CO
I
I
i
Z
M
Lij
z
0
w<
z
LLI
__j
0
:DU3rj
<
0
<
Z
ry-
cc
<
<
ca-
—1
co
0
cr
LLJ
>--
cl)
uj
0
C)
'<
r -C
<
Z
<
:5
Ed
�:e
0
o
U5
Cc)
Cc
cz
0
C)
=
<
<
0
P
o
<
Cow
L<U
I
: E
=
0
<
a-3:
::3
n.
ME
�0-
CO
I
I
i
November 13, 1997
There being no further business before the Commission, the
meeting was adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
Date i -
Secret rye Cha' an