pc_05 28 1985LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSIO N
MINUTE RECORD
MAY 28, 1985
1:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
II.
A quorum was present being nine in number.
Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
The minutes were approved as mailed.
III.Members Present:Je rilyn Nicholson William Ketcher Bill Rector Dorothy Arnett Richard Massie John Schlereth Betty Sipes David Jones Jim Summerlin
Members Absent: Ida Boles John Clayton
City Attorney: Torn Carpenter
'---'-
May 28, 1985
Item No. A -Z-649-A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Me lvin Bell
Same By: Robert A. Newcomb
1706, 1712 and 1714 East 2nd Street
Rezone from "I-2" Light Industrial to "C-3" General Co mmercial
Lodge
Existing Use:
0.71 acres +
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-River, Unclassified-Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-4"-Vacant, Zoned "I-3"-Vacant, Zoned "R-4"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1. The proposal is to rezone the site to "C-3" for the Fr aternal Order of Police Lodge. The property is located in a part of east Little Rock that has very mixed land use and zoning patterns. In the immediate vicinity of the location under consideration, the zoning includes "R-4," "C-3," "I-2," and "I-3." The land use is similar with single family, commercial and industrial uses present. Land on the north side of East 2nd from this property to the east is vacant. To the west, there is a large parking area for use on the south side of East 2nd.
2.The site includes three lots that are vacant andcovered with concrete. The property at one time was occupied by a structure.
3.East 2nd Street is identified as a minor arterialwhich normally requires 80 feet of right-of-way. The existing right-of-way is 60 feet. Engineering will discuss the need of additional right-of-way at the hearing.
May 28, 1985
Item No. A -Continued
4.There have been no adverse comments received from thereviewing agencies as of this writing.
5.There are no legal issues.
6.There is no documented neighborhood position on thesite. The property was rezoned to "I-2" a number of years ago.
7.Staff's position is that the proposed use isappropriate for the site and supports the request.Because of the makeup of the area, the lodge shouldhave only a minimal impact, if any, on the surro undinguses. There is no established zoning pattern or planfor the neighborhood, so the rezoning will not be inconflict with those types of concerns.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff reco mmends approval of the rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMI SSION ACTION: (April 30, 1985)
The applicant was not present. Staff informed the Planning Commission that the applicant ha d failed to notify the required property owners. A motion was made to defer the request to the May 28, 1985, meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (May 28, 1985)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a written request for withdrawal. A motion was made to withdraw the item. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. B -Z-4419
Owner: Dwight Jackson
Same Applicant:
Location: 2812 Commerce Street
Request: Rezone from "R-3" to "C-3"
Purpose: Co mmercial
Size: 7,000 square feet
Existing Use: Vacant and Single Family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North -Single Family, Zoned "R-3"South -Single Family, Zoned "R-3"East -Interstate Right-of-Way, Zoned "R-3"West -Single Family, Zoned "R-3"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1.The request before the Planning Commission is to rezonethe one lot at 2812 Commerce Street to "C-3." Nospecifics have been provided at this time, but itappears that the use will be some type of small retailestablishment. The immediate block is occupied bysingle fami ly residences or vacant lots, and the zoningis residential. The land use in the area isresidential with "R-3" being the predominant zoningclassification. To the south, there is some "I-2" inplace and to the north there is both "C-3" and "C-4."Some of the "C-3" adjacent to East Roosevelt is vacantwhich is a more appropriate location for a commercialuse. With the "C-3" lots to the northeast on thefrontage road, one is vacant and the southern one isoccupied by a billboard. Probably the most significantland use to impact neighborhood is I-30, but because ofthe property's location, that does not create a goodjustification for a commercial rezoning. Even being onthe frontage road the lot is somewhat removed from moreviable commercial locations.
2.The site is occupied by a single family residence andan accessory building in the rear. The lot is50' x 140' feet.
May 28, 1985
Item No. B -Contin ued
3.There are no right-of-way issues or Master Street Planrequirements.
4.The traffic engineer has expressed some concerns aboutthe parking and the access. There have been no otherocmments received from the reviewing agencies as ofthis writing.
5.There are no legal issues.
6.There is no documented neighborhood position or historyon this site.
7.Staff believes that the location is inappropriate for acommercial reclassification and does not su pport therequest. The property is a singl e residential lot withimproper size for a quality commercial use ordevelopment. The existing structure has no set back on the south property line, and this could have an impacton the residence to the south if the property wasrezoned. The "C-3" rezoning would probably bemisplaced because of the makeup of the immediate blockand its distance from East Roosevelt, the more logic alarea for a commercial use. Staff also questions thedesirability of continuing nonresidential en croac hmentinto older residential neighborhoods.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the "C-3" request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (March 26, 1985)
The applicant, Dwight Jackson, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Jackson said that the existing st ructure would be removed and a building for a small retail outlet would be constructed. He said that he owned the property to the north and presented a proposed design concept utilizing some of that land. Mr. Jackson said that a majority of the residents supported the proposal. Beverly Jackson then addresed the Planning Commission. She said that the proposed use would benefit the neighborhood. Ms. Jackson discussed the size of the new building and how the site plan would work. There was a long discussion about se veral issues, including utilizing a portion of another lot for the project. A motion was made to defer the it em for 45 days to allow the owner to get with the st aff and resolve the various problems. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. B -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: {May 28, 1985)
The applicant, Dwight Jackson, was present. There were no objectors in attendance. Staff informed the Commission that Mr. Jackson had submitted a preliminary site plan utilizing the one lot at 2812 Commerce. Because of this and other information, the Planning staff recommended that "C-1" be approved with a conditional use permit for the proposed use, an eating place. Mr. Jackson then sp oke. He sa id that he 'd met with the Pla nning staff on several oc casions and that the residents of the area were in support of the proposal. After some additional comments, Mr. Jackson agreed to amending the application to "C-1." The motion was made to recommend approval of the amended request to "C-1" and waive additional filing fees and further notification of property owners for the conditional use permit. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 1 -Z-1422-A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Waldo Jones
Ma ury Mitchell
5923 South University
Rezone from "C-3" General Commercial to "C-4" Open Diplay
Auto Service
10,400 square feet +
Auto Service
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Commercial, Zoned "C-3"-Vacant, Zoned "C-3"-Commercial, Zoned "I-2"-Commercial, Zoned "C-3"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposal is to rezone the property to "C-4" for an auto service facility. The parcel of land is located on South University in an area that has a mix of "C-3," "C-4" and "I-2" zoning. With the site abutting "I-2" to the east and "C-3" north and south. (The property directly to the south is on this agenda, Z-1721-A, for rezoning to "C-4" also.} The land use is primarily commercia! with some light industrial uses. Be cause of the makeup of the area, staff feels that the "C-4" rezoning will have no adverse impacts on the other properties and supports the request.
(One final item for discussion is the applicant's desire to include the tract directly to the north as part of this rezoning action. This request was made after the legal ad had been published which only described the south 100 feet of the lot. The notification to other property owners sent by the applicant included a map showing the entire tract, not just the portion initially filed for.)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "C-4" as filed.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 1 -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The appl icant, Maury Mitchell, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Mitchell addressed the issue of including the north 130 feet of the lot with the re zoning action being considered. After some discussion, the Commission decided to only act on the portion of the property that was properly advertised, the south 100 feet. The Commission then voted to reocmmend "C-4" as filed. The vote -9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 2 -Z-1721-A
Owner:
Appl icant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Alice Miller
Same By: H.Oscar Hirby
6001 South University
Rezone from "C-3" General Commercial to "C-4" Open Diplay
Auto Dealership and Service
20,000 square feet +
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Vacant, Zoned "C-3"-Vacant and Si ngle Family, Zoned "R-2"-Commercial, Zoned "I-2"-Commercial, Zoned "C-3"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone the property in question to "C-4" for an auto dealership. The site is located on South University which is the type of street that the "C-4" district is designed for. With the exception of a large tract to the south zoned "R-2," the im mediate vicinity is zoned for nonresidential uses. Abutting this property are lands zoned "C-3" and "I-2" with a sim ilar zoning pattern on the west side of University. There are no outstanding issues and staff views the rezoning as being appropriate for the location.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the "C-4" request as filed. The vote 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
Ma y 28, 1985
Item No. 3 -Z-3106-A
Owner: Various Owners
William L. Te rry Applicant:
Location: 5324, 5326 and 5332 "A" Street
Rezone from "R-3" Single Family to "O-1" Quiet Office Request:
Purpose: Office
Size:
Existing Use:
19,800 square feet + (3 lots)
Single Family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Single Family, zoned "R-3" and "R-4"-Office, Zoned "O-3"-Single Family , Zoned "R-3"-Single Family, Zoned "R-4"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1.The request is to rezone three residential lots to"O-1" Quiet Office. At this time, no specific planshave been provided so it is unknown whether a newstructure will be constructed on the site or if theexisting residences will be converted to small offices.The property is located in a block that is made up ofentirely of single family residences. There is onevacant lot to the east of the three lots in question.To the south the block is zoned "O-3" with office usesand associated parking, but there are three singlefamily structures remaining that appear to be used forresidential purposes. Across Tyler Street to the west, the block is residential with single family to median density uses. North of the lots to Lee Boulevard the area is single family with a scattering of duplexes. The general land use pattern appears to be a mix of residential uses north of "A" Street with primarily nonresidential uses south of "A" Street.
2.The site is located at the northeast corner of "A" andTyler Streets and is made up of three typicalresidential lots. Each lot is occupied by a smallsingle family residence.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 3 -Continued
3.There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request.
4.The Engineering staff has provided the followingcomments: (1) boundary street improvements and(2)access and parking must be approved by the trafficengineer.
5.There are no legal issues.
6.There is no documented neighborhood position on thesite. The previous action on one of the lots, Z-3106, was to permit parking in a residential district. It was denied by the Board of Adjustment in 1977.
7.The area is part of the Heights/Hillcrest Plan whichwas adopted by the City in 1981. The plan identifiesthis particular location for continued single familyuse north of "A" Street so the rezoning would be inconflict with the plan if approved. The planrecognizes office use to be restricted to the blockbetween "A" and Markham Streets in the immediate area.Besides being in conflict with the plan, staff isconcerned that the approval of this rezoning would be asignificant intrusion into a residential neighborhoodand would probably have a far reaching effect on theremainder of the area north to Lee. Staff's positionis that "A" Street has been established as a linebetween residential and nonresidential uses over theyears, and it should be maintained. The primary usenorth of "A" Street is still single family residentialwith the exception of some parking areas east ofHarrison. To the west of Polk, there is a largeconcentration of multifamily units north of "A." Itappears that a significant portion of the units between"A" and "B" are rental which adds to the instability ofan area and a nonresidential zoning could have a veryharmful effect on that type of neighborhood. It ispossible with an area such as this the effects of therezoning could extend to Lee Street and disrupt thelivability of the area. Under the circumstances, staffcannot support the rezoning proposal because of thepotential adverse impacts.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "O-1" request.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 3 -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, William L. Terry, was present. There were no objectors present. Mr. Terry sp oke and indicated that he was representing the three owners of the lots. He said that the proposal was to utilize the existing structures and "0-1" was an appropriate reclassification for the land. He also pointed out that there were no ob jectors in attendance. Dr. Charles Fowler, one of the property owners, then addressed the Commission. He described the plans for the buildings and said the owners including hi mself were ha ving problems renting the residences. Dr. Fowler presented some letters of support and several photos of ne arby properties. He said that the rezoning would not hurt the neighborhood and reminded the Commission members that there were some parking lots on the north side of "A" Street ea st of Harrison.
There was a long discussion about rental property in the area and the demand for it. Dr. Fowler said that "A" Street was a questionable area and that a logical st opping point for nonresidential zoning could be the alley north of "A" Street. He said the uses on the south si de of "A" ha ve impacted the residential properties on the north side, and there is a greater demand for office properties. Mr. Terry spoke again and addressed several points such as the location, no objectors present, the letters of support and various zoning actions since adoption of the Heights/Hillcrest plan in 1981. He asked the Planning Commission to consider passing the re quest on to the Board of Directors without a recommendation. Dr. Fowler then addressed various issues brought out during the he aring. The Planning Commission voted on the "0-1" request as fi led. The vote -0 ayes, 7 noes, 2 absent and 2 abstentions (David Jones and Bill Rector). The rezoning request was denied.
\__
May 28, 1985
Item No. 4 -Z-4435
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
George Downey
Same
13001 I-30
Rezone from "R-2" Single Fa mily to "C-4" Open Display
Trailer Sales
5.1 acres +
Trailer Sales and Ma nufacturing
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Interstate Right-of-Way, Zoned "R-2"-Vacant, Zoned "R-2"-Industrial, Zoned "R-2"-Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposal is to rezone the site to "C-4" for trailer sales. The property is located on the south side of I-30 in close proximity to the Saline County line. The uses in the area are all nonresidential, primarily heavy commercial or light indu strial, but still zoned "R-2." On the north side of I-30, there is a large "C-4" strip that extends from County Line Road back to the east over one-half mile. The uses are very mixed with commercial and industrial.
The Suburban Development Plan identifies the area for strip development and the Otter Creek Plan shows it for a mix of commercial and industrial uses. Based on this, the "C-4" rezoning is compatible with the area.
Engineering reports that approximately 60 percent of the property is located within the 100 year floodplain. Flood proofing or floor elevations is required to elevation 311.5 feet USGS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C-4" request.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 4 -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objector s. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the "C-4" request as filed. The vote -9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 5 -Z-4 437
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Re quest:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Indoor Tennis Center Associate
Phil Wiggins
4600 Sam Peck Road (Westside Tennis Center)
Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "AF" Agricultural and Forestry
Parking
3.13 acres +
Vacant
SUR ROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East west
-Multifamily, Zoned "MF-12"-Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-2"-Tennis Center, Zoned "AF"-Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request before the Planning Commission is to rezone approximately 3.1 acres to "AF" to allow parking for the Westside Tennis Center. The tennis center itself is zoned "AF." In the "AF" district, a permitted use is a "governmental or private recreational uses limited to golf courses, tennis courts, swimming pools, playgrounds, day camps and passive recreational open space." In addition to the tennis center, other uses include single family to the south and west with a large multifamily project to the north. Also across Sam Peck Road to the east, there is YMCA branch a similar use. Staff feels that the rezoning will have little if any impact on the area and supports the req uest.
Boundary street improvements for Peckerw ood Road are required at this time from Sam Peck Road to the west side of Lot 16. The staff would also point out that the approval of the rezoning request does not change any prior financial commitments made and attached to previous actions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "AF" request.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 5 -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff informed the Planning Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter requ esting that the rezoning be withdrawn. A motion was made to withdraw the item. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 no es and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 6 -Z-4439
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Arkansas School Board Association
Randy Kerr
808 High Street
Rezone from "R-5" Urban Residence to "0-3" General Office
Office
12,000 square feet
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Single Family, Zoned "C-3"-Industrial St orage, Zoned "I-2"-Interstate Right-of-Way-Multifamily, Zoned "C-3"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone a singl e lot in the I-630/High Street vicinity to "O-3" for an office use. The property is located on the south side of I-630 and in an area that ha s a very mixed land use pattern that includes multifamily, office, commercial and some industrial. The zoning is very similar with "R-5," C-3" and "I-2" ab utting this particular site. There does not appear to be any outstanding issues and staff supports the request. The rezoning should have no impact on the immediate area.
Parking and access shall be approved by the traffic engineer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The appl icant was present. There were no objec tors. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the rezoning as filed. The vote -9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 ab sent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 7 -Z-4441
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Gladys P. Linthicum
Same
5300 West 65th Street (West of Lancaster)
Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "C-3" General Commercial
Commer cial
13,500 square feet
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Vacant, Zoned "I-2"-Commercial, Zoned "C-3"-Vacant, Zoned "C-3"-Vacant, Zoned "I-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone the lot to "C-3" for a comme rcial/retail use. This particular site has "C-3" on two sides and abuts "I-2" on the west and north property lines. The property is the only remaining "R-2" piece fronting West 65th Street within approximately 1,000 feet in either direction of the intersection with Lancaster. Because of the location and the existing zoning pattern, a "C-3" reclassification is appropriate for the site.
Engineering reports that an access shall be approved onto West 65th by the traffic engineer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C-3" request.
PLANNING COMM ISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors in attendance. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the "C-3" request as filed. The vote -9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 8 -Z-4442
Owner: Southern Investment Company
Bill Ba rger Applicant:
Location: 811 Rogers Avenue
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "C-4" Open Display
Purpose: Auto Re pair Garage
Size: 0.71 acres +
Existing Use: Auto Repair Garage (Nonconforming)
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North South East West
-Vacant, Zoned "R-2"-Vacant, Zoned "R-2"-Industrial, Zoned "I-3"-Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1.The proposal is to rezone three lots to "C-4" for anauto repair garage. The request was filed as a resultof the action taken by the City's Enforcement Office.A garage began operation on the site prior to receivingthe necessary rezoning approvals. The property islocated on the fringe of the residential neighborhoodin east Little Rock. Directly to the east is "I-3"zoning with a rendering plant that has adverselyimpacted the area. Further to the east on East 9th isa sewer treatment facility, and to the southeast is theairport, zoned "I-2." From Rogers to the west, theprimary land use is single family with some vacantlots. At the end of Rogers is a levy and then theArkansas River. Rogers Avenue is a residential streetthat for the most part terminates at the levy. TheZoning Ordinance recommends that appropriate locationsfor the "C-4" district are along heavily traveled majortraffic arterials. The desirability of establishing a"C-4" site at this location can be questioned becauseof being removed from a major street.
'
May 28, 1985
Item No. 8 -Continued
2.The site is three residential lots and occupied bysubstandard non residential structures. There are also some automobiles on the property that appear to be inoperable. The lots are heavily overgrown and an eyesore for the neighborhood. (During a site vis it, a resident complained ab out all of the sna kes and ra ts coming from the property.)
3.There are no right-of-way requirements or Master StreetPlan issues associated with this request.
4.There have been no adverse comments received from thereviewing agencies as of this writing.
5.There are no legal issues.
6.The property has had a nonresidential use on it in thepast but not recently. There is no documentation toestablish a nonconforming status for the lot. Based on the calls received by staff, the residents of the neighborhood are opposed to the "C-4" rezoning.
7.Staff recognizes that the existing "I-3" zoning and usehave impacted the property in question, but is concerned that the approval of the "C-4" will only addto those problems and adversely effect the livabilityof the neighborhood. To the west of the site, theresidential character of the area ha s been maintainedfor the most part wit h the exception of a truckingconcern seven blocks to the west. Wit h the amount ofvacant land found in the area, a residential rezoningbeyond the existing lines could encourage similaractions for those tracts and further compound theneighborhood's problems. Staff does not support therequest because of being mispl aced, the potential foradding to the existing problems and adversely impactingthe neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "C-4" request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Bill Barger, was present. There were four objectors in attendance. Mr. Ba rger spoke and gave a brief history of the property. He said that the lots had been used for a lumber warehouse in the past and the current use,
May 28, 1985
Item No. 8 -Continued
an auto repair garage, occupied the property prior to the necessary zoning being accomplished. He went on to say that the site had been imp acted by the rendering plant to the east and noise from the airport. Mr. Barger also said that the auto garage was the only use proposed for the lots and that the substandard wood structures would be removed. There was a long discussion by the appear ance of the property and other prob lems. Mrs. Mae Jones then spoke in opposition to the rezoning request. She informed the Commission that she had lived on the west side of Rogers for 32 years and that the residents wanted to maintain the residential character of the neighborhood. Mrs. Jones went on to say that the lots needed to be cleaned and it was no t a good place to have an auto garage. After some additional comments, the Planning Commission voted on the rezoning as filed. The vote -0 ayes, 9 noes and 2 absent. The request was denied.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 9 -Z-4443
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Paul Birnbach Jr.
Same
East Roosevelt at Levee
Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "AF" Agriculture and Forestry
Residence and Agricultural Related Accessory Building
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North -Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"South -Vacant, Zoned "R-2"East -Single Family (Vacant Greenhouses),Zoned "I-2"West -Vacant, Single Family and Commercial,Zoned "R-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposal for the property in question is to construct a single family residence and agricultural related accessory building. Because of the latter use, it was determined that an "AF" reclassification for the land was an appropriate process to use. The purpose of the "AF" district is "to provide an usable zoning definition and to provide for certain compatible land uses during the interim period between annexation and final determination of proper zoning districts for the ultimate development of the area." This property was recently annexed into the City as part of the referendum area that was upheld by the Supreme Court. The site is vacant and being located between the levee and Fourche Creek, it appears that the rezoning will have no adverse impacts on the immediate neighborhood.
The location being considered for rezoning is part of the East River Island Plan which identifies the area for single family and some commercial uses. Staff feels that an "AF" rezoning will not be in conflict with the adopted plan for the area and supports the request.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 9 -Continued
Engine ering reports that approxima tely 45 percent of the property is in the 100 year floodplain. Because of the proposed use, this should have very littl e effect on the site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "AF" rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The Commission voted to recommend approval of rezoning as filed. The vote 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 10 -Z-4445
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Wade D. and Glena C. Bratton
Wade D. Bratton
5018 Club Road
Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "C-3" General Commercial
Office
7,000 square feet
Office
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North -Single Family, Zoned "R-2"South -Commercial, Zoned "C-3"East -Parking, Zoned "C-3"West -Commercial, Zoned "C-3"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
This request is before the Planning Commission to "clear" the record. A number of years ago, the City rezoned certain properties by resolution and that appears to be the case with this particular lot. This method of rezoning existed between 1937 and 1955. There are no accurate records of those actions that can be located. When the rezonings were transferred to the new maps with the adoption of the current ordinance, this action was not included because of no official record. The case file for the "C-3" parcel to the east indicates a rezoning action for the west half of that lot. (The zoning map has been corrected to reflect the "C-3" zoning.)
There is currently a building on a site that is being used for offices. This building has been in place for a number of years and was constructed when the lot was shown to be "C-3."
Staff urged the owner to file a rezoning application to clarify the record on the lot and supports the action.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 10 -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objecto rs. The Commis sion voted to recommend approval of the rezoning as filed. The vote -9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 11 -Other Matters -Street Name Change
Name:
Location:
Petitioner:
Request:
Abutting Uses and Ownerships:
Neighborhood Effect:
Neighborhood Position:
Effect on Public Servi ces:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Flynn Street Approximately 140 feet in length
Lying east off Hinson Road approximately 1/4 mile south of Pebble Beach Drive
Floyd Fulkerson By: Elvin Shuffield
To change the name of the existing Flynn Street to Carmel Drive for the entire street length of 140 feet.
Outside of Mr. Fulkerson's subdivision plat, there are only two owners abutting Flynn Street and each of these presently take a street number from Hinson Road on the west.
No adverse effect is expected as there are no present users of this street.
No adverse comments have been received at this writing.
None reported from our mail contacts.
This request was filed by Mr. Fulkerson as the direct result of the recent signing of his final subdivision plat on the last phase of Pleasant Valley Addition. The current 140 feet of Flynn Street is not now and has never been utilized by the pub lic for addresses or location requirements. The abutting owners have signed off on this proposal and do not object to the actions of Mr. Fulkerson. The Planning staff recommends this name change.
May 28, 1985
Item No. 11 -Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (5-28-85)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission voted on a motion to recommend the change in street name on Flynn Street as proposed. The motion passed by a vote of: 9 ayes, O noes and 2 absent.
-"----
May 28, 1985
Item No. 12 -Public Hearing on Pr oposed Amendment to Suburban Development Pl an
This amendment is proposed in response to Planning Co mmission action on April 30, 1985. At that time, the Planning Commission approved a rezoning request on Autumn Road to rezone property from "R-2" Single Family to "C-3" Commercial.
It is proposed at this time that the Suburban Development Plan be amended to commercial land use on the northeast corner of the intersection of Hermitage and Autumn Roads. This represents a change from residential to commercial land use.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Chairperson Nicholson brought the Suburban Development Plan amendment up at the end of the consent agenda. The public hearing was declared opened. No one wanted to speak and the hearing was closed. The Co mmission voted to approve the plan amendment: 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
May 28, 1985
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
�-�� C:\;,JJ:sso� cba'rprso \