pc_06 16 1987LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTE RECORD
JUNE 16, 1987
1:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being 9 in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
The minutes were approved as mailed.
III. Members Present:
Members Absent:
Bill Rector
Betty Sipes
William Ketcher
Rose Collins
Richard Massie
John Schlereth
Fred Perkins
David Jones
Walter Riddick III
Jerilyn Nicholson
Dorothy Arnett
City Attroney: Stephen Giles
June 16, 1987
Item No. A - Z- 4695 -A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Valentine Hansen and
Valentine Pardo
Valentine Hansen
400 North Van Buren
Rezone from "R -3" to "C -1"
Commercial
0.15 acres
Office
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND 'ZONING:
North - Single Family, Zoned "R -3"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R -3"
East - Duplex, Zoned "R -4"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R -3"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request is to rezone a single lot to "C -1" for an
unspecified commercial or office use. The property is
located at the northwest corner of North Van Buren and
"C" Street in a neighborhood that is primarily zoned
for residential use, either single family or two
family. The land use is almost exclusively single
family residential, especially north of "B" Street. To
the south of "B" Street, the zoning is more of mixed as
is the land use. Between "B" Street and West Markham,
the zoning includes PCD, "0 -3," "C -3" and "C -4" with a
commercial zoning being concentrated between West
Markham and "A" Street. The surrounding neighborhood
is a stable residential area and allowing commercial
zoning at this location could create some problems for
the neighborhood.
2. The site is a 45' x 123' lot with three structures on
it. Two of the buildings are used for residential
purposes, and the third one, located on the corner, is
a real estate office.
3. There are no right -of -way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
June 16, 1987
Item No. A - Continued
4. Engineering reports that parking is inadequate for a
rezoning from "R -3" to "C -1." Also, if parking is
provided, the access point should be shown and improved
by the traffic engineer.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. There is no documented neighborhood position on the
site. The property has been used for both office and
commercial uses over the years so it has some
nonconforming status. In July 1986, a "C -1"
application was filed for the property. After being on
the agenda for several months, the request was finally
withdrawn without prejudice in September 1986.
7. The request is in conflict with the adopted
Heights /Hillcrest Plan and staff does not support the
"C -1" rezoning. Over the years, attempts have been
made to allow nonresidential zoning to encroach north
of "A" Street. In each of those instances, staff has
been opposed to the rezonings. "A" Street has always
been viewed by the staff as an appropriate line between
nonresidential and residential uses that should be
maintained at all costs. Several years ago, an "O -1"
request was filed for the lot at the southeast corner
of "C" and North Van Buren to allow for a conversion of
a residential structure into an office. That rezoning
was denied by the both Planning Commission and the
Board of Directors. This particular request, if
approved, could have a very adverse impact on the
neighborhood and establish an undesirable precedent for
the area. Also, with three buildings on the lot, the
site is not a viable commercial tract of land. And
finally, the property is not completely restricted to a
residential use only. Because the structure on the
corner has a nonconforming status, it can continue to
be occupied by an office use.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "C -1" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING_ COMMISSION ACTION: (May 5, 1987)
Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred. A
motion was made to defer the request to the June 16, 1987,
meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes,
and 1 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. A - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 16, 1987)
The applicant, Valentine Hansen, was present. There were no
objectors. Mr. Hansen reported to the Commission that he
had paid the fee and had completed the necessary
notification of the property owners. He then requested a
deferral to allow him to discuss the rezoning proposal with
representatives of the Hillcrest Property Owners
Association. A motion was made to defer the item to the
July 28, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote
of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. B - Z -4823
Owner: Joseph and Nannie Briscoe
Applicant: Joseph Briscoe
Location: 10724 and 10726 Baseline Road
Request: Rezone from "R -2" to "I -2"
Purpose: Industrial /Storage
Size: 10.6 acres
Existing Use: Storage
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "R -2"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R -2"
East - Vacant, Zoned "R -2"
West - Vacant and Industrial, Zoned "R -2" and "I -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The issue is to rezone approximately 10.6 acres on Baseline
Road from "R -2" to "I -2." The property is located on that
portion of Baseline that is between I -430 and the Arkansas
Highway and Transportation Department headquarters north of
where Sibley Hole Road intersects Baseline. The land in the
immediate vicinity is primarily vacant, but there are some
single family residences and industrial uses in the area.
The zoning is "R -2" with the exception of an "I -2" tract
that abuts the site on the west side. Rezoning of that
particular property was accomplished in 1986, and at that
time, a plan amendment was also adopted for the Otter Creek
District Plan which designated the area north of Baseline
Road for industrial uses. This request is within that area
so it conforms to the amended plan. The property is used
for storage and that will not change in the near future.
Baseline Road is classified as a minor arterial so
dedication of additional right -of -way will be required.
Engineering will have to determine how much right -of -way is
needed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "I -2" rezoning as filed.
June 16, 1987
Item No. B - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(May 5, 1987)
Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred because
the notification of property owners had not been completed.
A motion was made to defer the request to the June 16, 1987,
meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 noes, and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 16, 1987)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of "I -2" as requested.
The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 1 - Z- 3773 -A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Harold L. Durham
Richard Durham
4726 Asher Avenue
Rezone from "I -2" to "C -3"
Bar and Grill
0.25 acres
Commercial
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family, Zoned "R -3"
South - Commercial and Industrial, Zoned "I -2"
East - Commercial, Zoned "I -2"
West - Industrial, Zoned "I -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
This rezoning was originally
Commission in November 1981,
"I -2" to "C -3." The propose
club with the possibility of
Planning Commission approved
ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
acted on by the Planning
as conversion adjustment from
i use at the time was a private
some adult entertainment. The
the request by a vote of 9
After the Planning Commission action the item was forwarded
to the Board of Directors for their approval. The Board did
not pass an ordinance rezoning the property and deferred the
issue indefinitely. This action was taken because of the
proposed use and some problems that were occurring along
Asher Avenue with similar establishments. At that time,
late 1981, the issue of adult entertainment and appropriate
locations was being addressed by the City and residents
along the Asher Avenue corridor. During those discussions
there was mention made of an ordinance regulating locations
of adult entertainment establishments. One of the reasons
for the Board's deferral of the request was to allow the
Planning Commission to consider such an ordinance but it was
never developed or finalized.
Several months ago the applicant approached the Planning
Office without putting the rezoning back on the Board of
Directors' agenda. He was instructed to submit a letter to
the City Clerk for that to be done. The item was placed on
a tentative agenda but removed because of concerns with the
June 16, 1987
Item No. 1 - Continued
time that had passed and several changes in the makeup of
the Board of Directors. Staff was told to file the rezoning
for a Planning Commission hearing and for the owner to
notify property owners.
The rezoning is still from "I -2" to "C -3" but the use is a
bar and grill. The rezoning pattern along Asher is very
mixed and reclassifications should have no impact on the
area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C -3" request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The.applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the request as
filed. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2
absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 2 - Z -4816
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
M.B. Seligman
Ronald C. Burrow
6020 Cantrell Road
Rezone from "R -2" to 110 -3"
Of f ice
0.13 acres
Existing Use: Single Family
RTIPP0T7MT)TNC: T.ANTI T7gV ANTI 7.OMTN(:!
North - Commercial, Zoned "0 -3"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R -2"
East - Commercial, Zoned "0 -3"
West - Single Family, Zoned, "R -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone the northeast corner of University
Avenue and Cantrell Road from "R -2" to "0 -3" for an office
use. The site is currently occupied by single family
residents and the plans are to convert the structure into a
small office. The property abuts office zoning on the east
and north sides with "R -2" across both Cantrell and
University. Land use in the area follows the zoning pattern
with the majority of the nonresidential uses located to the
north and east of Cantrell /University intersection. There
are some exceptions to that, the Prospect Building area
south on University and the southwest corner of University
and Kavanaugh.
This location is in the Heights /Hillcrest Plan area which
identifies the property as part of an open space buffer
along the north side of Cantrell east of University. That
concept was initially proposed through the old Forest
Heights Plan which recommended a 25 -foot green belt. The
strip is zoned "0 -3" and over the years it has been
maintained by not allowing any commercial zoning to encroach
into it. Staff feels that the proposed rezoning will not
change the direction of the existing plan or the original
one and supports the request. Because of the existing
zoning and the pattern that has developed over the years,
this reclassification should not have any impact on the
neighborhood. Approval of this request is not endorsement
June 16, 1987
Item No. 2 - Continued
of future rezonings for other corners of the intersection
because their relationship to nonresidential properties is
very different from the lot in question.
Engineering reports that access and parking may be a problem
on the site. Because of this, the Traffic Engineer should
approve parking and access plans. Also, right -of -way may
need to be dedicated for both University and Cantrell. The
owners should contact the City Engineer's Office concerning
the required right -of -way.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "0 -3" as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the "0 -3" request.
The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2
absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 3 - Z -4832
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Harry M. Booe
Same
Stagecoach Road West of I -430
Rezone from "R -2" to "C -3"
Food Store
4.6 acres
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North
- Vacant,
Zoned
"R -2"
South
- Vacant,
Zoned
"R -2"
East
- Vacant,
Zoned
"R -2"
West
- Vacant,
Zoned
"R -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposal before the Commission is to rezone the site
to "C -3" for purposes of constructing a food store. The
property is located on Stagecoach Road /Highway 5 just west
of the I -430 interchange. Zoning in the area is primarily
"R -2" with several isolated PCD, "C -4 ", and "I -2" locations.
Development is concentrated along Stagecoach Road and
includes a mix of residential, commercial, and some
industrial. In addition to the developed parcels, there is
a high percentage of vacant land especially on the south
side of Stagecoach Road. The properties abutting the site
are vacant with the Fourche Creek Floodway on the south.
This area is part of the Otter Creek District Plan which
recommends a mixed commercial and industrial land use
pattern. "C -3" is a compatible zoning district for that
type of development and staff supports the rezoning request
for a portion of the property. The south 1.32 acres is in
the designated floodway so that area should be rezoned to
"O -S" and then dedicated to the City.
Stagecoach Road is classified as a principle arterial on the
Master Street Plan which requires a minimum of 100 feet of
right -of -way. It appears that dedication of additional
right -of -way will be required based on other rezoning
attempts in the area. At this time, the exact amount of
dedication is unknown because the survey only indicates a
variable right -of -way. Engineering will provide the
June 16, 1987
Item No. 3 - Continued
specifics prior to the Board of Directors taking final
action.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. Floodway dedication is required.
2. Right -of -way and street improvements are required.
3. The Traffic Enqineer has a suggestion that may become a
requirement to provide access to the three adjoining
lots back to the east. If the adjoining properties
back to the east are zoned commercial, then an access
road should be dedicated and provided across the site
to serve the other three properties. If not, the other
three tracts may be landlocked.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "C -3" and "O -S" for the
floodway portion of the property which is also to be
dedicated to the City.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present and agreed to amend the request to
"C -3" and "O -S" for the designated floodway. There were no
objectors. A motion was made to recommend approval of the
amended application to "C -3" and "0 -3." The motion passed
by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. (The floodway is
to be dedicated to the City.)
June 16, 1987
Item No. 4 - Z -4834
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Richard E. Jones
Same
I -30 East of Mabelvale Pike
Rezone from "R -2" to "C -4"
Motorcycle Dealership
1.0 acres
Industrial (Vacant)
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Industrial, Zoned "R -2"
South - Interstate Right -of -Way, Zoned "R -2"
East - Commercial, Zoned "C -4"
West - Industrial, Zoned "R -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone a 1 acre site from "R -2" to "C -4"
for a motorcycle dealership. The property is situated on
the I -30 frontage road with "C -4" zoning on the east and
nonconforming industrial uses to the west and north. A
majority of the area if still zoned "R -2" because of being
annexed to the City. The rezoning changes that have
occurred are a mix of "C -3," "C -4," and "I -2" which is the
type of pattern that is recommended by the various land use
plans that cover the I -30 corridor.
Access and parking may be a problem with this site. The
Traffic Engineer suggests that access be from the frontage
road only.
There are no outstanding issues associated with this request
and staff supports the "C -4" rezoning.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C -4" request as filed.
PLANNING-COMMISSION-ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the "C -4" request
as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes,
and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 5 - Z -4835
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Kanis Road Partnership
Robert L. Shurgar
11117 Kanis Road
Rezone from "R -2" to 110 -3"
Office
0.36 acres
Single Family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family, Zoned "R -2"
South - Vacant, Zoned "O -S"
East - Commercial, Zoned "R -2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The site under consideration is part of the I -430 district
plan which recommends office use from Shackleford Road to
Autumn Road. This proposed land use designation also
extends from a 40 -foot "OS" strip abutting this tract on the
south to north of the Financial Centre Parkway. The
existing zoning is a mix of "R -2," 110 -301" "C -2," and "C -3"
with some "O -S." Land use is very similar with both
residential and nonresidential uses found in the immediate
vicinity. The major office development is occurring to the
north the Financial Centre area, and to the south, the Koger
Office Park. Smaller office uses like what is being
proposed for this property are found throughout the area and
they have not had any impact on the residential uses.
Staff's position is that the rezoning request to "0 -3" is
compatible with the adopted plan and supports the proposed
reclassification. The site abuts a single family residence
to the west and a nonconforming commercial use to the east
which should not be affected by the "0 -3" change.
Kanis Road is classified as a minor arterial which normally
requires an 80 -foot right -of -way. The survey shows an
existing right -of -way of 60', so dedication of additional
right -of -way will be required.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 5 - Continued
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. Right -of -way and street improvements are required on
Kanis Road.
2. Stormwater detention is required.
3. A traffic access and parking plan must be approved by
the Traffic Engineer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "0 -3" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the "0 -3" rezoning
as requested. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 6 - Z -4836
Owner: Earl E. and Maxine S. Williams
Applicant: Earl E. Williams
Location: 1212 Bowman Road
Request: Rezone from "R -2" to "C -3"
Purpose: Commercial /X -Ray Company
Size: 0.62 acres
Existing Use: X -Ray Company
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Office, Zoned "R -2"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R -2"
East - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R -2"
and "C -3"
West - Commercial, Zoned "C -3"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone the property at 1212 Bowman Road
from "R -2" to "C -3." The site is currently occupied by a
nonconforming use, an X -Ray Company, and the owner wishes to
correct that situation to avoid any problems in the future.
The use has been in place for a number of years and was
annexed to the City in 1985.
The I -430 District Plan identifies the Kanis /Bowman Road
intersection with the exception of the northeast corner for
commercial development. The "C -3" rezoning change is
consistent with the plan and staff supports the request.
The extent of the commercial area on the plan is the same as
the southern boundary of the existing "C -3" to the west, so
this rezoning will help reinforce that line. All recent
rezonings in the immediate vicinity have also conformed to
the adopted plan.
Bowman Road is identified as a minor arterial on the Master
Street Plan. A minor arterial requires a right -of -way of at
least 80 feet and the survey shows a deficient right -of -way
so dedication of additional right -of -way will be necessary.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 6 - Continued
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. Right -of -way dedication and street improvements are
required.
2. Access points must be approved by the Traffic Engineer.
3. Stormwater detention is required on -site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C -3" rezoning request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the request as
filed. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2
absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 7 - Z -4837
Owner: Marvin H. Clausing
Applicant: Same
Location: #8 Rosemont Drive
Request: Rezone from "R -2" to "R -4"
Purpose: Duplex
Size:
0.18 acres
Existing Use: Duplex (Nonconforming)
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North
- Single
Family,
Zoned "R -2"
South
- Single
Family,
Zoned "R -2"
East
- Vacant,
Zoned
"R -2"
West -
Single
Family,
Zoned "R -2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. This rezoning issue is before the Planning Commission
as the result of an enforcement action by the City.
The enforcement staff received a complaint concerning a
possible duplex at #8 Rosemont Drive. Upon
investigation, it was determined that a duplex did
exist and was in violation of the Zoning Ordinance
because of the existing "R -2" zoning. The owner was
issued a warning notice to either cease the illegal use
or file for the appropriate zoning action. The lot is
located in the southern part of the Broadmoor Addition
and directly across University Avenue from property
owned by UALR. Zoning in the immediate area is "R -2"
with the exception of the University frontage, south of
Broadmoor Drive, which is "C -3" and "C -4." The land
use follows a similar pattern with the Broadmoor
Addition being single family. Because of the UALR
influence, the owner determined that there was a need
for additional residential units and made the necessary
modifications to provide two separate dwelling units
for rental purposes.
2. The site is occupied by a residential structure that
had been converted into a duplex by remodeling the
storage /basement area. There are two separate
entrances, one in the front and one in the rear. The
lot has frontage on both Rosemont and University with a
substantial grade difference between the rear of the
property and University Avenue.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 7 - Continued
3. There are no right -of -way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
4. Access and parking that serve the proposed "R -4" use
may not be adequate. This must be approved by the
Traffic Engineer.
5. There is a legal issue attached to this rezoning and
that is the Bill of Assurance for the Broadmoor
Addition. In the land use and building type section,
the Bill of Assurance states:
No lot shall be used except for residential
purposes. No building shall be erected, altered,
placed, or permitted to remain on any lot other
than one detached single family dwelling not to
exceed 2 1/2 stories in height and a private
garage for not more than two cars.
Obviously, what has occurred on the lot in question is
a violation of that provision.
6. The only history on the site is the current
enforcement. There is no documented neighborhood
position.
7. Staff feels that the proposed rezoning is inappropriate
for the location and does not support the "R -4"
request. The primary reasons for this position is spot
zoning and the rezoning proposal is in conflict with
the Boyle Park District Plan which identifies the
neighborhood for single family use only. Another
concern is the Bill of Assurance and the possibility of
approving a rezoning that violates a specific provision
of it. The area appears to be a stable single family
neighborhood that is well- maintained and a rezoning
could have an impact on that by gradually shifting the
existing character to mixed residential.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "R -4" request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Marvin Clausing, was present. There were 19
objectors in attendance. Kenny Scott of the City staff
spoke first and reviewed the enforcement issue. He said
that a complaint was first made in September 1986, but a
second living unit was not documented at that time. Another
June 16, 1987
Item No. 7 - Continued
complaint was filed in February 1987, and a separate living
unit was found with complete kitchen facilities. Mr. Scott
also pointed out that a building permit had never been
obtained for any of the construction work. Mr. Clausing
then addressed the Commission and said that he owns the
property but does not reside at #8 Rosemont. He told the
Commission that the structure does have an efficiency
apartment but it was not his intention to violate any laws
or regulations. Mr. Clausing said that it appears that
other residences have rooms for rent because he has observed
UALR students walking through the neighborhood on several
occasions. He also said that he would be willing to pull
out the kitchen unit if that was the main problem. There
was a long discussion about definitions and other issues.
Mr. Clausing made some additional comments and said that a
plumbing inspection probably initiated some of the
enforcement action. Mr. Clausing pointed out that he did
receive a plumbing permit but there was never any mention of
a building permit. Bob Mize, representing the Broadmoor
Property Owners, read a statement opposed to the rezoning
and presented a petition with over 200 signatures. Mr. Mize
said there is a Bill of Assurance and that the neighborhood
use was well- maintained. He told the Commission that if you
increase density and /or add units, there would be problems
with cars and trash. Carl Scheihner, Jr., representing the
Broadmoor Improvement District, 586 families, said that the
district was against the rezoning and presented a copy of
the Bill of Assurance. He said that Mr. Clausing had
disregarded the Bill of Assurance and City regulations by
not obtaining a building permit and adding the unit. Mr.
Scheibner then submitted a letter from the President of the
Property Owners Association and the Improvement District
which stated the neighborhood's opposition to any rezoning
change. Mr. Clausing made some comments and said that he
could remove the kitchen facilities if necessary. There was
a discussion about the use and then the Commission voted on
the "R -4" rezoning. The vote 0 ayes, 9 noes, and 2 absent.
The request was denied.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 8 - Z -4838
Owner: Worthen Bank and Trust Company
Applicant: Eugene L. Lewis, Jr.
Location: Jamison Road at I -30
Request: Rezone from "R -2" to "I -2"
Purpose: Office /Warehouse
Size: 0.34 acres
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "I -2"
South - Office and Industrial, Zoned "I -2"
East - Vacant, Zoned "I -2"
West - Office, Zoned "I -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone a small tract from "R -2" to "I -2"
for an office /warehouse development. The parcel is
surrounded by "I -2" and for one reason or another this tract
was not included in any of the previous rezoning actions.
"R -2" and "I -2" are the two zoning districts found in the
area with the "R -2" locations being primarily land recently
annexed to the City. The land use is mixed and includes
single family, office, warehousing, and industrial.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "I -2" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the request as
filed. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2
absent and 1 abstention (Bill Rector).
June 16, 1987
Item No. 9 - Z -4839
Owner: Don Kirkpatrick
Applicant: David P. Henry
Location: Southeast of the intersection
of Mary Street and West 34th Street
Request: Rezone from "R -2" to 11I -2"
Purpose: Industrial
Size: 19.1 acres
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant and Industrial, Zoned "I -2"
South - Vacant, Unclassified
East - Vacant, Unclassified
West - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "I -2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposal is to rezone approximately 19 acres to allow
for the expansion of an existing industrial facility located
directly to the north. (The property is currently in the
process of being annexed and the annexation should be
completed by the Planning Commission public hearing.) The
site is located between Asher Avenue and Fourche Creek with
the southern portion of the tract being part of the Fourche
Creek Floodway. The area within the floodway will have to
be zoned "O -S" and dedicated to the City.
The zoning pattern south of Asher is primarily industrial
"I -2" and "I -3 ", so the proposed reclassification is
compatible with the area. There are still some parcels
zoned for residential uses in the immediate vicinity, but
those areas have been impacted by previous nonresidential
zoning actions. Rezoning of this property will not have any
effect on the neighborhood and will only reinforce the area
as a viable industrial location.
There is a plan element involved with this request and that
is the Master Parks Plan. An area referred to as the
"Fourche Bottoms" is designated as proposed park land on the
plan. This area extends from Mabelvale Pike to "I -30" and
from the northern boundary of the tract under consideration
(the current City limits) to the south approximately one
mile. Some of this land is owned by the City and shown as
June 16, 1987
Item No. 9 - Continued
an existing park. The status or possible acquisition of the
remaining land is unclear at this time. Staff will work
with the Parks Department to clarify the issue prior to the
hearing.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. Floodway dedication shall be required for the areas
that are not removed from the floodway by the current
construction.
2. Show the right -of -way for local widening or access if
it is within one property ownership.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "I -2" and "0 -S" for the
designated floodway with dedication of the floodway to the
City.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present and agreed to amending the request
to "I -2" and "O -S" for the floodway which is to be dedicated
to the City. There were no objectors in attendance. A
motion was made to recommend approval of the application as
amended to "I -2" and "O -S." The motion passed by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 10 - Z -4840
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Winrock Development Company, Inc.
and C.C.M.N. Joint Venture II
J.E. Hathaway, Jr.
15200 Kanis Road
Rezone from Unclassified to "0 -3"
and "C -3"
Office and Commercial
3.5 acres
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North
- Vacant,
Unclassified
South
- Vacant,
Unclassified
East
- Vacant,
Unclassified and "R -2"
West -
Vacant,
Unclassified
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request is to rezone a total of 3.5 acres from
Unclassified to "0 -3" and "C -3" for future development.
The property is currently outside the City but the
necessary annexation petition will be filed prior to
the Planning Commission acting on the request. The
land is located on the east side of Kanis Road between
Pride Valley Road and the Rock Creek Parkway.
Currently, Pride Valley Road is not constructed east of
Kanis but is anticipated that the completion of the
street will occur within a reasonable time period. In
the immediate vicinity all the land that is within the
City limits is zoned "R -2" which is primarily to the
east. Existing land use includes single family
residences and a school with a high percentage of land
vacant. All of the development that is taking place is
single family residential in the first phase of the
Wood Creek Subdivision which is west of the Parkway
Place neighborhood. A second phase is also proposed
which encompasses property to the north. In both
phases the lots will abut tracts of land that have
frontage on Kanis Road including the site under
consideration. Based on the development found in the
area and the existing zoning pattern along the Rock
Creek Parkway it is questionable whether this location
is appropriate for office and /or commercial zoning.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 10 - Continued
2. The site is vacant and wooded.
3. Kanis Road is classified as a minor arterial on the
Master Street Plan so dedication of additional
right -of -way will be required because the survey
reflects a right -of -way of 25 feet from the
centerline. Dedication of right -of -way for Pride
Valley is also needed because it is identified as a
collector.
4. Comments from Engineering include:
Street improvements are required for Kanis Road and
Pride Valley Road.
Off -site improvements for the alignment of Pride
Valley Road are required.
Stormwater detention is required.
Discuss the possible contribution of a traffic
signal at Pride Valley Road with approval of the
subdivision plat for this property.
5. There are no legal issues associated with this
rezoning.
6. Staff has received several informational calls
regarding this request. There is no documented history
on the site.
7. The location in question is part of the Upper Rock
Creek District Plan which identifies the general
vicinity for multifamily use at various densities.
This appears to be a reasonable land use pattern for
the area and staff's position is that the plan's
concept should be maintained. A low density
multifamily use could provide a good transition from
the recommended commercial location at the Kanis
Road /Rock Creek Parkway intersection and the area back
to the east on Kanis. Also, the Rock Creek Floodway
establishes a visible buffer between residential uses
and a proposed area of major nonresidential development
on the Rock Creek Parkway. Staff feels that there
already exists sufficient amounts of commercial and
office land along the Parkway corridor because of
previous actions through the old Rock Creek zoning Plan
and the recent rezoning of the Chenal Valley area which
added a substantial amount of commercial and office
June 16, 1987
Item No. 10 - Continued
land to the existing inventory. The need for
rezoning more land for nonresidential purposes is
not present or has it been demonstrated with this
request. To change the direction of the plan at
this time is questionable because it could
establish undesirable precedent and lead to the
possible stripping out of Kanis Road with
nonresidential zoning.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "0 -3" and "C -3" rezoning
request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOTE: Items 10 and 11, Z -4840 and Z -4841, were discussed
together.)
The applicant, Jim Hathaway, was present and said he would
be discussing Items 10 and 11. There was one objector in
attendance. Mr. Hathaway said he was representing Winrock
and C.C.M.N. Joint Venture II and indicated that Ron Tyne,
the applicant for Item 11, was also present to answer any
questions. Mr. Hathaway presented some graphics and said
that two applications were filed because of separate
property owners involved with the land. He went on to say
that Pride Valley and Kanis Road would be a major
intersection and then discussed the district plan for the
area. Mr. Hathaway described the proposed zoning and its
relationship to the single family subdivision to the east.
He said that an annexation effort was underway and reviewed
the land use. At that point, Mr. Hathaway responded to the
staff's recommendation and said there were several
constraints to use multifamily development: (1) the depth
from Kanis, (2) problems with the tract that had a body of
water on it, and (3) potential problems with existing
nonconforming uses. He said Winrock was a major land owner
and they have a good record as a responsible developer.
Mr. Hathaway felt that additional commercial zoning would be
needed in the vicinity because of future house counts.
There was a long discussion about the Rock Creek Parkway.
Ron Tyne then spoke and addressed Item 11. He said Winrock
was concerned with land uses adjacent to their subdivisions
and that they have had problems in the past with adjoining
multifamily developments. Mr. Tyne then discussed proposed
plats in the area and said that the land in question will
probably be sold. Larry Page, a resident on Kanis, spoke in
opposition to the rezonings. Mr. Page said that Winrock
created the depth problem and that the residential character
June 16, 1987
Item No. 10 - Continued
needed to be maintained. He said that there were problems
with Kanis and requested the Commission to adopt the staff's
report and recommendation. Staff then discussed the plan
and the transition zone concept. Additional comments were
offered by Mr. Hathaway and Mr. Tyne. Several Commissioners
felt that the requests were premature because the need for
additional office or commerical land had not been
established or demonstrated. Mr. Hathaway then amended the
application for Item 10 to all office, "0 -3." Final
comments were made by various individuals including
Mr. Hathaway and Mr. Page. The Commission then voted on the
"0 -3" request for Item 11. The vote was 1 aye, 8 noes, and
2 absent. The rezoning was denied. After that vote,
Mr. Hathaway requested that Item 10, Z -4840, be withdrawn
without prejudice. A motion was made to withdraw the
rezoning without prejudice. The motion was approved by a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 11 - Z -4841
Owner: Winrock Development Company
Applicant: Same
Location: Kanis Road (north and south of
Pride Valley Road)
Request: Rezone from Unclassified to "0 -3"
Purpose: Office
Size: 8.6 acres
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North
- Vacant
and Single
Family,
Unclassified and "R -2"
South
- Vacant
and Single
Family,
Unclassified
East
- Vacant
and Single
Family,
Unclassified
West -
Vacant,
Single Family, and
Office, Unclassified
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The proposal before the Commission involves
approximately 8.6 acres that includes several tracts of
land extending from Pride Valley Road to Rock Creek.
The request is to rezone the acreage from unclassified
or "R -2" at the time of annexation to "0 -3" for
unspecified office uses. Zoning in the area is
primarly "R -2" with some "MF -18" and "0 -3" on the north
side of the Rock Creek Parkway. Along Kanis Road there
are single family residences, a school and several
nonconforming uses. Also, across Rock Creek there is a
contractor's office and storage yard. The existing
single family uses are well- maintained and are situated
on large lots. New development that is occurring in
the immediate vicinity is exclusively single family
residences and that is taking place to the east in
several subdivisions. A majority of the land on the
west side of Kanis Road is still vacant.
2. The sites are vacant and one has a pond on it. The 4.4
acre parcel has some floodway involvement.
3. Dedication of additional right -of -way for both Kanis
Road and Pride Valley Road will be required. Pride
Valley Road is classified as a collector and Kanis Road
is a minor arterial.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 11 - Continued
4. The Engineering Comments are:
. Floodway dedication for Rock Creek is required.
Right -of -way and street improvements are required on
Kanis Road and Pride Valley Road.
5. There are no legal issues associated with this request.
6. Staff has received several informational calls about
this request. There is no documented history on the
site. (An annexation petition will be filed in the
near future for this area.)
7. The proposed rezonings are in conflict with the adopted
upper Rock Creek District Plan and staff does support
the request. The plan recommends a multifamily
development pattern for the area with nonresidential
uses /zoning located along th Rock Creek Parkway and
that land use concept should reinforce by not endorsing
this "0 -3" request. A low density multifamily
development is a reasonable use of the land and should
not create any problems for the adjacent single family
subdivision if properly designed. Rezoning these
tracts could have a negative impact on the area and
encourage strip zoning along Kanis Road from the
Parkway back to the east. Staff feels that there is an
adequate amount of land available for office and
commercial uses in this district and there is no real
justification for adding to that supply.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "0 -3" request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOTE: Items 10 and 11, Z -4840 and Z -4841, were discussed
together.)
The applicant, Jim Hathaway, was present and said he would
be discussing Items 10 and 11. There was one objector in
attendance. Mr. Hathaway said he was representing Winrock
and C.C.M.N. Joint Venture II and indicated that Ron Tyne,
the applicant for Item 11, was also present to answer any
questions. Mr. Hathaway presented some graphics and said
that two applications were filed because of separate
property owners involved with the land. He went on to say
that Pride Valley and Kanis Road would be a major
June 16, 1987
Item No. 11 - Continued
intersection and then discussed the district plan for the
area. Mr. Hathaway described the proposed zoning and its
relationship to the single family subdivision to the east.
He said that an annexation effort was underway and reviewed
the land use. At that point, Mr. Hathaway responded to the
staff's recommendation and said there were several
constraints to multifamily development: (1) the depth from
Kanis, (2) problems with the tract that had a body of water
on it, and (3) potential problems with existing
nonconforming uses. He said Winrock was amajor land owner
and they have a good record as a responsible developer.
Mr. Hathaway felt that additional commercial zoning would be
needed in the area because of future house counts. There
was a long discussion about the Rock Creek Parkway. Ron
Tyne then spoke and addressed Item 11. He said Winrock was
concerned with land uses adjacent to their subdivisions and
that they have had problems in the past with adjoining
multifamily developments. Mr. Tyne then discussed proposed
plats in the area and said that the land in question will
probably be sold. Larry Page, a resident on Kanis, spoke in
opposition to the rezonings. Mr. Page said that Winrock
created the depth problem and that the residential character
needed to be maintained. He said that there were problems
with Kanis and requested the Commission to adopt the staff's
report and recommendation. Staff then discussed the plan
and the transition zone concept. Additional comments were
offered by Mr. Hathaway and Mr. Tyne. Several Commissioners
felt that the requests were premature because the need for
additional office or commerical land had not been
established or demonstrated. Mr. Hathaway then amended the
application for Item 10 to all office, "0 -3." Final
comments were made by various individuals including
Mr. Hathaway and Mr. Page. The Commission then voted on the
"0 -3" request for Item 11. The vote was 1 aye, 8 noes, and
2 absent. The rezoning was denied. After that vote,
Mr. Hathaway requested that Item 10, Z -4840, be withdrawn
without prejudice. A motion was made to withdraw the
rezoning without prejudice. The motion was approved by a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 12 - Z -4842
Owner: Cabalette Properties
Applicant: John A. Castin
Location: West Baseline Road west of
Stagecoach Road
Request: Rezone from Unclassified to "MF -18"
Purpose: Multifamily
Size: 14.0 acres
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Unclassified
South - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R -2" and "MF -12"
East - Vacant, Zoned "R -2"
West - Vacant, Unclassified
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. This request, Unclassified to "MF -18," involves 14
acres on West Baseline Road approximately one mile west
of Stagecoach Road. (An annexation petition has been
filed and the rezoning will not be forwarded to the
Board of Directors until the petition is on the Board's
agenda). The surrounding land is undeveloped and on
the south side of Baseline Road there are several
single family uses. Also, the site is in close
proximity to a later phase of the Otter Creek
Subdivision. Zoning in the area includes "R -2,"
"MF -6," "MF -12," "MF -24," and "O -S" with all the
multifamily locations still vacant.
2. The site is vacant and relatively flat.
3. West Baseline Road is classified as a minor arterial on
the Master Street Plan and the recommended right -of -way
for a minor arterial is 80 feet. It appears that the
existing right -of -way is deficient so dedication of
additional right -of -way will be required with this
rezoning.
4. Engineering reports that:
Right -of -way dedication and street improvements are
required.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 12 - Continued
. Show the access points.
. Drainage permit is required.
. Stormwater detention facilities are required.
5. There are no legal issues associated with this
request.
6. There is no documented history or neighborhood position
on the site.
7. This location is part of the new Extraterritorial Land
Use Plan and more specifically the Southwest District.
For the site in question, the Plan recommends a
multifamily use with a density between 12 and 18 units
per acre. After reviewing the existing zoning and the
plan, staff's position is that the requested density of
"MF -18" is too high for the area and recommends "MF -12"
as being more appropriate. This is consistent with the
most recent multifamily rezonings directly to the south
which have been to "MF -6" or "MF -12." It should be
noted that this area is also part of the Otter Creek
District Plan which recommends multifamily uses for the
south side of Baseline Road only.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "MF -12" and not "MF -18" as
requested.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 16, 1987)
The applicant, Jack Castin, was present. There were no
objectors. Mr. Castin discussed the request and said that
the owners needed the "MF -18" zoning to better market the
property. He then pointed out that the adopted plan shows a
larger area for multifamily use and described other
multifamily zonings in the area. Mr. Castin told the
Commission that the property under consideration is part of
a larger tract, 55 acres, with the balance of the land to be
reviewed as a PRD for a single family development. He went
on to say that a proposed collector will divide the site and
that a possible compromise could be five acres of "MF -12"
and nine acres of "MF -18" with the "MF -12" area to the east
of the proposed collector. Mr. Castin discussed the PRD in
some detail and made additional comments. There was
discussion about deferring the rezoning request to the PRD
June 16, 1987
Item No. 12 - Continued
hearing and Mr. Castin agreed to a deferral. A motion was
made to defer the item to the June 30, 1987, meeting. The
motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent,
and 1 abstention (Richard Massie).
June 16, 1987
Item No. 13 - Z -4834
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Abe Rosen
Joe D. White
Mabelvale Pike north of West
65th Street
Rezone from "R -2" to 110 -3"
office
1.1 acres
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North
- Church,
Zoned
"R -2"
South
- Vacant,
Zoned
"R -2"
East
- Single
Family,
Zoned "C -3"
West
- Single
Family,
Zoned "R -2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request is to rezone a 1 acre site from "R -2" to
"0 -3" for an unspecified office use. The property is
situated on the west side of Mabelvale Pike just north
of West 65th Street. The area is heavily developed
with nonresidential uses found on the east side of
Mabelvale Pike and single family residential to the
west. There are some exceptions to that pattern, such
as the southwest corner of Mabelvale Pike and West 65th
which is a nonconforming commercial use and a
residential strip on the east side of Mabelvale Pike,
south of West 65th. Also, there is a church directly
to the north of this tract. Existing zoning in the
area reflects the land use with the entire area west of
Mabelvale Pike zoned "R -2." To the east the zoning
includes "C -3," "C -4," and "I -2."
2. The site is vacant.
3. Dedication of additional right -of -way for Mabelvale
Pike will be required.
4. Engineering Comments are:
Access points shall be approved by the Traffic
Engineer.
June 16, 1987
Item No. 13 - Continued
Right -of -way dedication and street improvements are
required.
Stormwater detention is required.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. There is no documented history on this site. Staff has
received several calls concerning this request.
7. In February of this year, the City adopted a Land Use
Plan for the 65th West District which covers a large
area from University Avenue to west of I -430 which
includes the site in question. The plan recognizes
Mabelvale Pike as a viable line separating residential
and nonresidential uses and recommends single family
use for the property. This is the concept that has
been supported over the years through previous planning
efforts and other rezoning actions. Staff feels that
allowing a nonresidential reclassification west of
Mabelvale Pike could adversely impact the neighborhood
and initiate a slow transformation of the area. The
break that Mabelvale Pike has firmly established should
be maintained by not grantinq this "0 -3" rezoning.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "0 -3" request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 16, 1987)
The applicant, Joe White, was present. There were several
interested residents in attendance. Mr. White addressed the
Commission and described the area and existing land use. He
said that the site has been vacant for years and that a
single family use for it is probably unrealistic. Mr. White
said that the owners have a contract to sell the property
for a specific use, a mortuary. He also said a 50 -foot "OS"
strip could be provided along the west property line and the
proposed building would be one story. Jim Huson, the
perspective buyer, said that he was having to relocate an
existing facility on South University and went on to
describe the funeral home operation. He also said that most
of the property would be used for parking. Brad Wooten, a
nearby resident, said the quiet business was desirable but
he expressed some concerns with the "0 -3" rezoning. Rick
Wilson voiced his opposition to the "0 -3" request and said
that drainage was a problem. A member of the church to the
north presented a petition opposed to the rezoning and made
several comments. J.C. Wuneberger said that he has some
June 16, 1987
Item No. 13 - Continued
problems with the "0-3" proposal because of the height and
some of the other permitted uses but felt that a quiet
business was a reasonable option. Mr. Wuneberger said that
Mabelvale Pike was a good dividing line that needed to be
maintained. Tony Lucas said that he was not opposed to the
use, a mortuary, but felt that the rezoning could cause some
problems. There was some discussion about utilizing a PCD
for the property and Mr. White agreed to converting the
application to a PCD and then amended the request. He also
requested that any additional fees and notification be
waived and the item be deferred to the June 30th meeting
because of a time problem. A motion was made to defer the
amended application, PCD for a mortuary, to the June 30th
meeting and to waive additional notification of property
owners and the filing fee. The motion was approved by a
vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent.
DAT�, &, f/81
-
P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
V O T E R E C O R D
ITEM NUMBERS
·ZONING SUBDIVISION
MEMBER If. a I � 3 if 6 /p ?� 9 /0 II j�
W.Riddick, III / ✓ ./ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ •/ ✓ / • ,/
J.Schlereth / ✓ / ✓ / ✓ / ✓ • / ✓✓ ✓/
R.Massie ,/ ,/ / ./ / ✓ ✓ ✓• / / / • /lb
B.Sioes / / / / / / / ✓ • / ·/ ✓•,/
11 .J. Nicholson I I
w.Rector / ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ,,/ ✓ ✓ • II& / ✓ • /
W.Ketcher / ✓ ✓ ✓-✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ • /· ✓ / • /
D.Arnett A II/
D.J. Jones / ✓ ✓ / / ✓✓ ✓ •/ / v •✓
R.Collins / ,/ ?' ✓ ✓ ,/ ✓ / • / / / • ✓
F.Perkins / / / ✓ / ✓✓ •✓ � �/•/
✓AYE � NAYE A ADSENT ':e_ABSTAIN
I� I f
✓
/
/
n ,4
./'
n /
,/. /
June 16, 1987
There being no further business before the Commission, the
meeting was adjou'r]ned at 3:30 p.m.
Date
Chairman Secretary