Loading...
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