Loading...
pc_12 01 1987LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE RECORD DECEMBER 1, 1987 1:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A quorum was present being 10 in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The minutes of the October 20, 1987, meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Bill Rector Martha Miller Stephen Leek Rose Collins Jerilyn Nicholson T. Grace Jones John Schlereth Fred Perkins David Jones Walter Riddick III Richard Massie Members Absent: None City Attorney: Stephen Giles December 1, 1987 Item No. A - Z -4859 Owner: Eddie C. and Lorene M. Hopper and Harold and Shirley Smith Applicant: Harold Smith Location: 1400 and 1404 Bowman Road Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "C-3" Purpose: Commercial Size: 2.44 acres Existing Use: Single Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Commercial, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The proposal is to rezone 2.4 acres on Bowman Road from "R-2" to "C-3" for an unspecified commercial use. The property is situated approximately 700 feet south of Kanis Road and in an area that is experiencing some changes since being annexed into the City. Over the last year, there have been several rezoning actions, and the land use is more diverse than when the area was outside the City. Land use includes single family, office, and various types of commercial activities. Also, a high percentage of the land is vacant, and there are still some nonconforming uses. The zoning is a mix of "R-2," "MF-12," "MF-18," "C-3," and PCD with a majority of the commercial tracts developed. There is also a "C-3" parcel that has a conditional use permit for a mini-storage complex on it. The property in question abuts single family uses on the north and south with a nonconforming piece of commercial property to the east across Bowman Road. The site is surrounded by "R-2" zoning with the nearest "C-3" land about 300 feet to the north. 2. The site is 2.44 acres in size and occupied by two single family residences. The property has a depth of 645 feet and includes two separate tracts of land. December 1, 1987 Item No. A - Continued 3. Bowman Road is classified as a minor arterial on the Master Street Plan. The right-of-way standard for a minor arterial is 80 feet and the existing right-of-way is deficient, so additional dedication will be required. 4. Comments from Engineering include: . Right-of-way dedication and street improvements required on Bowman Road. . Stormwater detention required. . Parking and access should be coordinated with the Traffic Engineer. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. The property was annexed to the City in 1985. There is no documented neighborhood position on the site. 7. This part of Bowman Road is in the I-430 District Plan which identifies the property under consideration for future multifamily use. Because of the commercial request being in conflict with the adopted plan, staff does not support the "C-3" rezoning. Other rezoning actions in the vicinity have conformed to the plan, and staff feels that the land use plan should be reinforced in this area by not endorsing this reclassification. On the west side of Bowman Road, the plan shows the southwest corner of Bowman and Kanis for commercial use with a multifamily development pattern to the south, including the site in question. For the east side, the plan extends the commercial area to include a large nonconforming use directly across the street from the property. Staff is concerned that granting a commercial rezoning at this location could lead to strip zoning and have a potentially adverse impact on other residential properties. The I-430 Plan needs to be maintained as much as possible, and the approval of this rezoning could establish an undesirable precedent for the area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "C-3" rezoning request. December 1, 1987 Item No. A - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (July 28, 1987) The applicant, Harold Smith, was present. There was one interested resident in attendance. Mr. Smith described the area and discussed a possible deferral to try to include more property in the request. He reviewed the existing land use and discussed two nonconforming uses, a skating rink and a landscaping company. Mr. Smith also said that the neighborhood was trying to form a sewer improvement district. He then proceeded to discuss Bowman and Kanis Roads and said the first two blocks from a major intersection should be commercial. The staff reviewed the I-430 plan and answered questions. Olan Asbury, a realtor, spoke and said that he did not agree with the plan and asked for more time to work with the staff. Mr. Asbury indicated that the Kanis and Bowman intersection was a natural commercial location and the plan's recommendation for a multifamily use was not feasible. There were some additional comments and several Commissioners indicated a rezoning action without benefit of a plan or proposal would be premature. Another Mr. Smith, a resident to the south, discussed the issue and asked some questions. Mr. Harold Smith then requested a 12 week deferral. A motion was made to defer the item to the October 20, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (10-20-87) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a written request for a deferral to the December 1, 1987, meeting. A motion was made to defer the item as requested. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) (Items A and No. 3, Z-4859 and Z-4859-A, were discussed together.) The applicant, Harold Smith, was present and said that he was representing all the property owners. There were no objectors. Mr. Smith discussed at length the properties involved and impacts from the skating rink across Bowman Road. He also presented a survey of the site and distributed a letter from the skating rink owner to the Planning Commission members. Mr. Smith told the Planning Commission that the skating rink was creating a lot of problems for the area and showed some photos. He went on to address the staff's recommendation of "MF-18" and said a multifamily development was unrealistic for the site. He also said that development at West Markham and Bowman will have an impact on the Kanis /Bowman intersection because of December 1, 1987 Item No. A - Continued increased traffic flow and other factors. Mr. Smith told the Commission that he has tried to sell his property for a number of years, but because of the location no one has expressed any interest in the land. Eugene Smith, another property owner, addressed the Commission and reinforced the comments made by Harold Smith. Harold Smith then reviewed the "C-2" district and said "MF-18" was undesirable. Staff then discussed the I-430 District Plan and that a multifamily reclassification was a reasonable use of the land. Additional comments were offered by various individuals and Mr. Smith then amended the rezoning to "MF-18" for both Z-4859 and Z-4859-A. A motion was made to recommend approval of "MF-18" as amended. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. B - Z -4885 Owner: L & S Concrete Applicant: Charles T. Weaver By: Doug Weaver Location: County Line Road South of I -30 Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "I-3" Purpose: Industrial Size: 12.57 acres Existing Use: Industrial (Nonconforming) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family and Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Unclassified (Saline County) PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The request is to rezone approximately 12.5 acres on County Line Road from "R-2" to "I-3" for an existing concrete plant. (The application was filed after the owner received a notice from the City because of an enforcement action.) The property is located north of I-30 and in an area that is not heavily developed. Across County Line Road and to the east and south, the land is primarily vacant. Some of the land to the south is a private park which is the City of Alexander. To the north, there are several single family residences on large lots adjacent to County Line Road. The zoning is all "R-2" with the exception of an "R-7A" tract to the southeast. In both the city of Alexander and Saline County, there is no zoning. 2. The site is flat and occupied by equipment and machinery necessary for the concrete operation. Along the south boundary is Crooked Creek and all the property is in the floodplain with about the southern one -third in the floodway where most of the improvements are located. December 1, 1987 Item No. B - Continued 3. There are two possible Master Street Plan issues associated with the request. County Line Road /the West Belt is classified as a principal arterial so it appears that dedication of additional right-of-way will be required. Also, the Master Street Plan identifies a proposed minor arterial connecting County Line Road /the West Belt with County Line Road along the south line between Pulaski and Saline County. The alignment shown on the Master Street Plan appears to bisect a portion of this property. This alignment is very general in nature so it is somewhat difficult to judge its exact impact on a site under consideration. Staff will work with Engineering to clarify these matters prior to the public hearing. 4. Engineering comments include: . Floodway violation. Master Street Plan issue for minor arterial through property. Detention ordinance requirements. Excavation Ordinance requirements. County Line Road (Alexander Road) right-of-way dedication and street improvements: 1/2 of a 90' . right-of-way and 1/2 of a 48' street. . Sidewalks, etc. 5. There is some uncertainty about the property's status whether it is nonconforming or not. Also, it appears that no permits have been obtained for any of the work including the current expansion. 6. The property was annexed to the City in 1979, and the use has been in operation since 1981 based on information provided by the applicant. 7. The property in question is located in the Otter Creek District Plan area which recommends a mixed industrial /commercial pattern for the location. The plan does not suggest any specific zoning classification but states that "PCDs" are encouraged. With this type of broad land use designation, staff feels that the request is compatible with the plan and supports an "I-3" reclassification for the property which is outside the established floodway only. City policy requires that the floodway be rezoned to "OS" and dedicated to the City, but the normal procedure of dedicating floodway lands could create a possible hardship in this situation because most of the improvements are located within the floodway. Crooked December 1, 1987 Item No. B - Continued Creek is not identified on the Master Parks Plan as open space so it could be possible to utilize something other than dedication to protect the floodway. Because of this and several other concerns, staff feels that it would be beneficial to delay on this request to give the City and owner more time to resolve the various issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the item be deferred to the October 20, 1987, meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (September 8, 1987) Staff recommended that the item be deferred because of several unresolved issues. A motion was made to defer the request to the October 20, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (October 20, 1987) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred because the floodway issue had not been adequately addressed. A motion was made to defer the request to the December 1, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 1, 1987) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred again and the owner did not object to another deferral. A motion was made to defer the request to the January 12, 1988, Planning Commission Meeting. The motion was approved by vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. C - Z-4898 Owner: Jimmy Jones Applicant: Same Location: 12721 I-30 Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "C-4" Purpose: Commercial Size: 2.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - I -30 Right-of-Way, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Commercial, Zoned "C-4" West - Commercial, Zoned "C-3" STAFF ANALYSIS: The property in question is located on the south side of I -30 and in the Otter Creek District Plan area which recommends a mix of commercial and industrial land uses for the general area. "C-4" is compatible with that type of pattern, and the existing zoning includes "C-3," "C-4," and "I-2." Land use is very similar to the zoning with a high percentage of the land still undeveloped and zoned "R-2." Some of the land is impacted by Crooked Creek and its floodway, so that obviously has affected the rate of development. This particular site has no floodway involvement. There are no outstanding issues associated with this request, and staff supports the rezoning. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "C-4" request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Staff reported to the Commission that the item needed to be deferred because the notices were mailed less than the required ten days. A motion was made to defer the request to the December 1, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. C - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "C-4" rezoning as requested. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 1 - Z- 4103 -A Owner: University Properties, Inc., and Bill Lusk Applicant: John L. Burnett Location: Broadmoor North Phase II (Northmoor, Charlotte and Garfield Drives) Request: Rezone from "R-2" and "O-2" to "O-3" Purpose: Office Size: 12.95 acres + Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Church, Office, and Commercial, Zoned "R-2, "R-5,” and "O-3" South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Church and Commercial, Zoned "R-2" and "C-3" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" and "R-4" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The proposal is to rezone 10.5 acres (12.9 acres including the street right -of. -way) in the Broadmoor North Subdivision from "R-2" and "O-2" to "O-3" for some type of office park development. No specific plans have been submitted, so it is unknown how the lots will be developed and /or marketed. Broadmoor North is located to the southwest of the intersection of West 12th and University Avenue. There are a total of 45 lots included in this request, and none of them have any direct relationship to either West 12th or University Avenue which is critical to an office area this size. Without access to a major street and having to utilize residential streets for traffic circulation, the proposed "O-3" rezoning is questionable. Also without the high visibility gained from having some frontage on a major street, the potential for this type of land use to work is marginal at hest. Another factor that must be carefully considered when reviewing this request is the desirability of allowing a nonresidential rezoning to encroach into an established single family neighborhood. When selecting December 1, 1987 Item No. 1 - Continued a viable office site, there are some basic criteria that should be considered, and that does not appear to be the case with this request. 2. There are 45 lots and two streets, Garfield and Charlotte Drives, involved with this request. All the lots are vacant, and the site is relatively flat. The lots under consideration have frontage on either Garfield or Charlotte. 3. There are no right -of -way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. 4. As of this writing, there have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies. 5. There is an apparent legal issue allied with this rezoning and that is the Bill of Assurance for Broadmoor North. The Bill of Assurance restricts the land use to detached single family residences so it appears that the Bill of Assurance will have to be amended at some point, if the rezoning is granted. To amend the Bill of Assurance, it takes 70 percent of the property owners. Also, the Bill of Assurance requires that the grantor's, Winrock Development Company, approval must first be obtained before any amendment can be made as long as the grantor owns any lots or land in the subdivision. It is the staff's understanding that Winrock still owns several lots within the subdivision. 6. Originally, the area under consideration was part of the University Park Urban Renewal Plan which was in effect from 1964 to 1984 and expired in June 1984. The Urban Renewal Plan also restricted use of the land to detached single family units. The lots are now a part of the Broadmoor North Subdivision which was approved in the late 19701s. In October 1983, a rezoning request from "R-2" and "C-3" to "MF-12," "O-2," and "O-3" was filed for basically the same tract of land. The first application included approximately 12 acres and properties that have frontage on both West 12th and University Avenue. The issue was deferred several times, and the request which had been amended to "O-2" for all the lots was finally heard by the Planning Commission in May and June of 1984. At each of the hearings, there were objectors from the area who expressed concerns with traffic, property values, and impacts on the residential neighborhood. After much debate a modified proposal was approved for 5.2 acres of "O-2," the existing zoning pattern. Winrock December 1, 1987 Item No. 1 - Continued Development Company was opposed to the 1984 rezoning request. 7. Staff's position is that the proposed "O-3" reclassification is inappropriate for the location and does not support the request. Some of the major issues have been presented in other sections, but there are a number of other concerns. - The appropriateness of filing an application for nonresidential zoning on land that is restricted to detached single family use. - The request does not conform to the adopted Boyle Park Plan which shows single family residential for the lots. - The possible encroachment of nonresidential uses into a viable single family neighborhood. - The request appears to be speculative in nature. - Access is totally inadequate for the proposed rezoning, and the use of residential streets is undesirable. The proposal is contrary to good land use and planning because of various factors, and the "O-3" reclassification could have a very adverse impact on the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "O-3" rezoning as requested. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12 -1 -87) The applicant was represented by Pete Hornibrook. There was one objector in attendance. Staff reported to the Commission that the applicant submitted a written request for deferral, but it was received after the five working days as required by the Planning Commission Bylaws. There was some discussion about the request and the objector said that he was not opposed to deferring the rezoning. A motion was made to defer the request to the January 12, 1988, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 2 - Z- 4470 -A Owner: CCMN Joint Venture II Applicant: J.E. Hathaway, Jr. Location: Rock Creek Parkway Request: Rezone from "MF-18" and "O-3" to "O-3" and "C-3" Purpose: Mixed Use Size: 19.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Unclassified, Zoned "MF-18" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "MF-18" and PRD West - Vacant, Zoned "O-3" STAFF ANALYSIS: The site under consideration is at the west end of the Rock Creek Parkway and involves approximately 19 acres. The request is to rezone the property from "MF-18" and "O-3" to "O-3" and "C-3." The proposal will add some commercial zoning, increase the amount of office land, and decrease the multifamily area. How the property will be developed or subdivided is unknown because only a rezoning concept is shown on the survey. In addition to the use areas, two proposed streets are also identified on the survey with one road being a north /south arterial as shown on the new Extraterritorial Land Use Plan /Upper Rock Creek District Plan. The entire site, a total of 40 acres, was originally rezoned to "MF-18" and "O-3" in 1985. (At the time of filing the first rezoning action, the land was outside the City and was annexed during the rezoning process.) The previous rezoning was delayed on several occasions to allow for additional study of the area because the Suburban Development Plan showed a single family residential development pattern. It was finally determined that a zoning configuration as proposed was a reasonable option for the 40-acre tract. The Upper Rock Creek District Plan recommends a mix of multifamily, office, and commercial uses for the site, so the proposal basically follows the plan's concept. There are two discrepancies between the plan and the proposed rezonings. On the plan, commercial property is shown December 1, 1987 Item No. 2 - Continued on both sides of the proposed arterial. With this request, the commercial area is all east of the north /south arterial, and staff feels that is a reasonable variation from the plan. The other difference involves the proposed office area between the commercial and multifamily tracts. There is a major drainage /utility easement through the property, and the plan shows the easement functioning as the break between the residential and nonresidential uses. In this area, the plan should be maintained and that would result in only a minor increase in the office land. As has been previously mentioned, there is a proposed north /south arterial shown on the plan that impacts the property. (This arterial is not identified on the current Master Street Plan, but it is included in the revised street plan that is currently being reviewed.) On the survey, the western boundary of the "C-3" tract is also alignment for the north /south road which staff is assuming is the new arterial. At this time, the City has not determined the exact location for the arterial and feels that cannot be done until a thorough traffic impact study is undertaken for the area. City staff feels that a comprehensive study is needed because of potential problems, and until one is completed, action on the rezoning request should be delayed. A study is needed because of the arterial and potential changes in traffic movement due to the proposed reclassifications. It is possible that the study could recommend a different location for the arterial and that would affect the requested rezonings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends an indefinite deferral until the traffic impact study is completed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) Staff reported that the applicant agreed with deferring the item. A motion was made to defer the request to the January 12, 1988, meeting. The motion was approved. The vote - 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 3 - Z- 4859 -A Owner: Valentine Balsam, Jeff Moore, Josh McHughes, and Eugene Smith Applicant: Harold Smith Location: 1308, 1316, 1406, 1408, and 1500 Bowman Road Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "MF-18" and "C-2" Purpose: Multifamily and Commercial Size: 10.0 acres Existing Use: Single Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Office and Commercial, Zoned "R-2," "C-3," and PCD South - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R -2" East - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2" and "C-3" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: (See Item A for additional information.) 1. The proposal before the Commission is to rezone a ten -acre site on Bowman Road from "R-2" to "MF-18" and "C-2." In July of this year, a commercial request for 1400, and 1404 Bowman (Item A - Z-4859) was filed for consideration, and it has been deferred two times. The first application covered 2.4 acres, and that area is included in the sketch for this item for purposes of presenting a more complete picture of the issue. During the hearing for Z-4859, several Commissioners suggested to the owner that he try to assemble more acreage, and this rezoning request is a result of that effort. The issue now is to rezone five acres to "C-2' for an unspecified commercial development and the balance of the property to "MF -18." (The owner of 1400 and 1404 Bowman has amended his request to "C-2. ") Zoning in the area includes "R-2", "MF-12 ", "MF-18 ", "C-3," and PCD. On the "C-3" parcel to the north, there is a mini - storage facility which was approved through the conditional use process. Most of the commercial zoning has occurred within the last several years because the area was annexed in 1985 and they have conformed to the December 1, 1987 Item No. 3 - Continued adopted plan. The existing land use is a mix of single family, office, and several types of commercial activity. Also, there are still some nonconforming uses on both sides of Bowman Road. 2. There are a total of eight residences on the ten acres along with several accessory structures. All the existing development is located adjacent to Bowman Road with the rear of the various parcels vacant. 3. Bowman is classified as minor arterial, so dedication of additional right-of-way will be required because the existing right-of-way is deficient. 4. Engineering has indicated that a total right-of-way of 90 feet is needed because this section of Bowman Road will have five lanes. Street improvements and dedication of right-of-way will be required. 5. There are no legal issues associated with this request. 6. There is no documented neighborhood position on the site. The property was annexed to the City in 1985. 7. Even with the additional acreage, staff is still opposed to a commercial reclassification at this location. The adopted I-430 Plan identifies the property for multifamily development, and staff feels that the plan needs to be maintained as much as possible. The need for additional commercial land has not been demonstrated with this request, and the proposed amendments to the I-430 Plan, recently endorsed by the Planning Commission, do not recommend any changes for the Bowman Road and Kanis Road intersection. As has been stated, other zoning actions in this area have conformed to the plan and that should be reinforced by not supporting this commercial reclassification. Other concerns include the potential for a strip development pattern and establishing an undesirable precedent if this "C-2" request is granted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "C-2" rezoning and approval of "MF-18" for the entire site. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) (Items A and No. 3, Z-4859 and Z-4859 -A, were discussed together. See Item A, Z-4859, for complete minute record.) December 1, 1987 Item No. 3 - Continued The applicant, Harold Smith, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Smith amended the request to "MF-18" for the entire site, approximately 10 acres. A motion was made to recommend approval of the request as amended. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 4 - Z-4890 Owner: Paul C. and Starr W. Watson Applicant: Paul C. Watson Location: 1309 Bishop Street Request: Rezone from "O-3" to "R-4" Purpose: Duplex Size: 0.16 acres Existing Use: Duplex SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "O-3" South - Single Family, Zoned "O-3" East - Multifamily, Zoned "R-5" West - Parking, Zoned "O-3" STAFF ANALYSIS: The request before the Commission is to rezone the lot at 1309 Bishop from "O-3" to "R-4" for a duplex. Based on a field check, it appears that the structure has been used as a duplex, but the property does not have nonconforming status, and an "R-4" reclassification is necessary. Zoning in the neighborhood includes "R-4," "R-5," "O-3," "C-1," and "C-3" with a majority of the existing zoning established through the Urban Renewal Program. The land use conforms to the zoning for the most part, but a number of the "O-3" lots are used for residential purposes. Because of the existing development patterns, the proposed "R-4" change will not have impact on the area, and staff supports the request. The only issue that the owner needs to be aware of is parking. A duplex is required to provide a total of three off-street spaces with the parking area meeting all the necessary ordinance standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of "R-4" as requested. December 1, 1987 Item No. 4 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "R-4" rezoning as requested. The motion was approved. The vote - 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 5 - Z-4916 Owner: John A. and Edna L. Mattingly Applicant: John A. Mattingly Location: West 65th and Wakefield Drive Southeast Corner Request: Rezone from "C-3" to "C-4" Purpose: Auto Sales and Detailing Size: 0.51 acres Existing Use: Auto Sales SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Industrial, Zoned "I-2" South - Commercial, Zoned "C-3" East - Commercial, Zoned "C-3" West - Commercial, Zoned "C-4" STAFF ANALYSIS: The property is currently being utilized for a used car lot, and the request is to rezone the site to "C-4" because "C-3" does not permit auto sales. In addition to the car sales, a detail shop is also proposed. Staff is unclear as to how the use was established prior to receiving a rezoning change, but the privilege license review probably determined a zoning problem, and the owner was instructed to file for a "C-4" reclassification. The site is situated at the southeast corner of the West 65th and Wakefield Drive intersection which has "C-4" zoning at the southwest corner and "I-2" to the north. Adjacent to the property on the south and east sides, the zoning is "C-3." Land use along West 65th is a mix of commercial and industrial with a large residential neighborhood, the Wakefield Subdivision to the south. Because of the pattern found on West 65th, the rezoning should not affect it or impact the residential area. Engineering recommends that the site only have one access point on each street because of the size of the property. Also, the owner needs to conform to all the ordinance standards for this type of use. December 1, 1987 Item No. 5 - Continued STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "C-4" rezoning as requested. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) 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 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 6 - Z -4930 Owner: Arkansas National Life Insurance Company Applicant: Eugene Lewis, Jr. Location: I -430 and Flintridge Road ( north of Stagecoach Road) Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "C-4" Purpose: Office and Office Warehouse Size: 32.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Single Family and Industrial, Zoned "R-2" and "C-4" East - I -430 Right -of -Way, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The request is to rezone a large tract of land, 32 acres, from "R-2" to "C-4" for an office and office warehouse development. Property is located to the northwest of the I -430 /Stagecoach Road interchange and takes access from Flintridge Road which is a narrow residential street. Flintridge Road intersects Stagecoach Road just west of the southbound ramps for I -430 and terminates at the western boundary of the property in question. The land use in the immediate vicinity is primarily residential or vacant. There is a light industrial use to the southwest of the property and at the intersection of Flintridge and Stagecoach, there is a large church. To the east of I -430, there is a mix of residential and small commercial uses. Some uses are nonconforming because the area was annexed to the City several years ago. Zoning in the area is made up of "R-2," "C-1," "C-2," and "C -4." The "C-2" tract is undeveloped, and the "C-4" property was rezoned because of the existing use. December 1, 1987 Item No. 6 - Continued 2. The site is heavily wooded with the property increasing in elevation from south to north. 3. There are right -of -way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. 4. Engineering has indicated that access is inadequate for the proposed development and that could create some serious problems. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history or neighborhood position on the site. 7. The property under consideration does not lend itself to a "C-4" reclassification, and the Otter Creek District Plan enforces that by showing the site for residential use only. Because of the location and the plan, staff does not support the "C-4" request. Reclassifying the 32 acres to "C-4" is an inappropriate and could have an impact on the I -430 corridor because of some of the permitted uses, and the rezoning does not ensure a quality office /office warehouse development. If the rezoning is granted, it would be very possible for the tract to be subdivided into small parcels and have a fragmented development pattern with some questionable uses. Another major concern is the access to the street system which is substandard for intense development. The site has visibility, but the user should be able to get to it without too much difficulty. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "C-4" rezoning as requested. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant, Eugene Lewis, was present. There were three objectors in attendance. Mr. Lewis addressed the Commission and said that the proposed use would be a high quality office /office warehouse development that would benefit from being near an interchange. He said he was also concerned with a "C-4" reclassification and that he would be willing to rezone the site to "C-3" with a conditional use permit for the office warehouse. There was a discussion about access and Mr. Lewis indicated that he would prefer not to use Flintridge but would have an internal circulation system for the development. Dan Roberts, a resident on Flintridge, spoke in support of the rezoning and said a quality office park was desirable. December 1, 1987 Item No. 6 - Continued Mrs. Dan Roberts also voiced support for the rezoning. Sandra Ingram opposed the rezoning and expressed some concerns with access. She said that it was difficult to get off of Flintridge. Phillip Craig, a resident of Flintridge for 15 years, was opposed to the rezoning and said he was concerned with potential grading, access and how the residential uses would be protected. Ronnie Keaton said he was against the "C-4" rezoning and would like the site to remain "R-2." Mr. Lewis then addressed the Commission again. He said the site would be left as natural as possible because that would ensure a quality development. Mr. Lewis then said that there would be time problems with a PUD because of building for a specific user. There was a long discussion about the various options and the Otter Creek District Plan. After some additional comments, a motion was made to withdraw the "C-4" request without prejudice and no additional filing fees for a PUD if one is filed. (Additional notification for a PUD will be required.) The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 abstention (Bill Rector). December 1, 1987 Item No. 7 - Z -4932 Owner: R.G. Harrison Applicant: Joe Davis Location: 317 Gamble Road Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "O-3" Purpose: Office Size: 0.5 acres Existing Use: Gun Shop SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Industrial Storage, Zoned "O-3" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" STAFF ANALYSIS: The location under consideration, Gamble Road and Lornea, is part of the Upper Rock Creek District Plan area which designates both sides of Gamble Road from West Markham to Lornea for office use. The proposal is to rezone the site from "R-2" to "O-3" so the rezoning is compatible with the adopted plan and the reclassification is not a significant issue. Engineering has indicated that right -of -way dedication and street improvements will be required for both streets. Gamble Road is identified as a collector on the Master Street Plan, and Lornea is a substandard residential street. The additional dedication of right-of-way could be a problem and delay the rezoning because the owner has disagreed to dedicating needed right-of-way. This was done through the "street right-of-way agreement form" which is signed at the time of filing a rezoning application. The applicant can either agree or disagree to dedicating additional right-of-way on this particular document. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "O-3" request as filed. December 1, 1987 Item No. 7 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant, Joe Davis, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Davis spoke briefly and said that he had no problems with dedicating additional right-of-way for Gamble Road. There was no further discussion and a motion was made to recommend approval of the "O-3" request as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 8 - Z -4933 Owner: CCMN Joint Venture II Applicant: J.E. Hathaway, Jr. Location: Kanis Road at Rock Creek Parkway Request: Rezone from Unclassified to "C-3" Purpose: Commercial Size: 8.85 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant and Church, Zoned "O-1" and "O-3" South - Single Family, Unclassified East - Office and Industrial, Unclassified West - Vacant and Single Family, Unclassified STAFF ANALYSIS: The rezoning request is to rezone property to "C-3" for an unspecified commercial use. The site is currently outside the City limits so it is unclassified; the property abuts the City limits on the north side. The land is vacant and located at the southeast corner of where Kanis Road intersects the Rock Creek Parkway. The site under consideration is part of the Upper Rock Creek District Plan area which recommends the location for commercial development. With this type of land use designation, the proposed "C-3" reclassification is appropriate, but staff feels that the rezoning action should be deferred for several reasons. The first and primary concern is the location of an arterial which the land use plan places along the east boundary of the tract. As with Item No. 2, Z-4470-A, this alignment has not been finalized and needs to be looked at in the recommended traffic impact study for the area. Also with the pending reclassifications, review of the entire street network should be part of the study to avoid any circulation problems in the future. The other issue has to do with the annexation of the property. In the past, the policy has been that the annexation petition must be filed with the County before the Planning Commission can act on the December 1, 1987 Item No. 8 - Continued request. Staff has not received any documentation to this effect, and the issue should be deferred until the proper filing is completed. One final plan element that needs to be mentioned is the Master Parks Plan. Some of the land in question is identified on the plan as Priority 2 Proposed Open Space. The priority system refers to the need for acquisition relative to other streams throughout the City. Because of the current rate of development in this part of Little Rock, all the waterways in West Little Rock could be categorized as Priority I. Another Parks Plan issue that could affect this property is the recommended open space acquisition width for Rock Creek. The plan suggests a minimum acquisition width of 350 feet for Rock Creek, and it is possible that could include some of this site. The Engineering staff is in the process of reviewing what is needed for this area in terms of acquisition. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the request be deferred until the traffic study is completed and the annexation issue is addressed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) Staff reported that the applicant was in agreement with deferring the item. A motion was made to defer the request to the January 12, 1988, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 9 - Z -4934 Owner: F.T.P. Properties Applicant: Ron Tabor Location: #1 Cantrell Place (Fairfield Office Park) Request: Rezone from "O-3" to "C-3" Purpose: Office Warehouse Size: 1.54 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Commercial, Zoned "C-3" South - Office, Zoned "O-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "O-3" West - Office, Zoned "I-2" STAFF ANALYSIS: The request is to rezone one lot in the Fairfield Office Park from "O-3" to "C-3" to accommodate an office warehouse, which also requires a conditional use permit. Since filing the rezoning request, the applicant has indicated that the use will be more of a conventional office with some storage space. Even with this proposed change in the use, the applicant still wants to pursue the "C-3" rezoning. Zoning north of Cantrell Road includes "O-2," "O-3," "C-3," and "I-2" with no established pattern so the proposed reclassification will not have any impact on the area. The existing land use is made up primarily of office and commercial uses with several tracts still undeveloped. In the immediate vicinity, there are several office buildings, so the proposed use is consistent with the existing development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "C-3" rezoning as requested. December 1, 1987 Item No. 9 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "C-3" rezoning. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 10 - Z-4937 Owner: Orbit Valve Profit Sharing Plans A and B Applicant: Gary Dunwoody Location: Mabelvale Pike and North Chicot Area Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "O-3" Purpose: Storage Building and Parking (for Scimitar Shrine Temple) Size: 2.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Shrine Temple, Zoned "O-3" East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant and Multifamily, Zoned "MF-18" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The request is to rezone a two -acre tract from "R-2" to "O-3" for the Scimitar Shrine Temple which is located to the south. The proposed use is a storage building and to provide additional parking for the temple which is zoned "O-3." Another possible use that has been mentioned is a play area, but no specifics have been provided. The property abuts an established single family neighborhood to the east, vacant land to the north, and a multifamily project on the west side. Zoning in the area is "R 2," "MF-18," "O-3," "C-4," and PCD. When the first "O-3" rezoning for the Shrine Temple was approved, the ten -foot "R -2" strip was left adjacent to the single family lots and that was done to prohibit access from the residential streets, Denise and Deborah. The ten -foot area is also an easement. 2. The site is vacant and flat. 3. There are no right -of -way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. December 1, 1987 Item No. 10 - Continued 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. As of this writing, staff has not received any communication from the residential neighborhood about this rezoning. with the first "O-3" rezoning, there were some concerns expressed by the residents of the subdivision to the east. There is no documented history on the site. 7. Staff feels that expanding "O-3" zoning for the proposed use is a reasonable option provided that the adjoining "R-2" land is buffered. To accomplish this, staff suggests a 50-foot strip on the north and east sides to be rezoned "OS" as part of the request. This will give the existing residential property some added protection and minimize any potential impacts from the proposed rezoning and the subsequent uses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of "O-3" with a 50-foot "OS" strip on the east and north sides. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant, Gary Dunwoody, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Dunwoody spoke briefly and said that he did not object to the "OS" area as suggested by the staff. A motion was made to recommend approval of "O-3" and "OS" for the north and east 50 feet as amended. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 11 - Z-4938 Owner: Arkansas Explosives, Inc. Applicant: Garver and Garver By: Steven L. Haynes Location: Otter Creek East Boulevard Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "I-2" Purpose: Industrial Size: 5.14 acres Existing Use: Vacant and Industrial SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Industrial, Zoned "I-2" South - Industrial, Zoned "I-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "I -2" West - Vacant and Industrial, Zoned "I-2" STAFF ANALYSIS: The proposal before the Commission is to rezone a tract of land in the Otter Creek Industrial Park area from "R-2" to "I-2." There are two lots involved, one developed, and the southern lot is vacant which is to be sold. This parcel is one of the "R-2" pieces remaining in the area, and not rezoning it before now was just an oversight. The "I-2" rezoning conforms to the adopted Otter Creek District Plan, and there are no outstanding issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "I-2" request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "I-2" request as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent. December 1, 1987 Item No. 12 - Z-4925 Owner: Maria G. Lafferty Applicant: Same Location: 1022 North Palm Request: Special Use Permit Purpose: Day -Care Family Home (10 children or less) Size: 0.15 acres Existing Use: Single Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-4" STAFF ANALYSIS: The issue is to review and grant a special use permit for a day -care family home. (This request was filed because of enforcement action by the City.) The Zoning Ordinance definition of a day -care family home is: Any facility which provides family-like child care in the care giver's own family residence in accordance with provisions of licensing procedures established by the state of Arkansas and which serves no more than ten children including the care giver's own children. Said facility must obtain a special use permit in all zoning districts where day-care centers are not allowed by right. Also, the Planning Commission shall have final authority except that appeals from the action of the Planning Commission may be filed with the Little Rock Board of Directors. The location, 1022 North Palm, is a conventional single family lot with a residential structure on it. The yards can provide an adequate open space area for the children which is necessary for a good environment and proper care. December 1, 1987 Item No. 12 - Continued Another important consideration for this type of use is the location of a drop -off point. With this lot, there appears to be two drop -off areas that are safe and remove the cars from the flow of traffic. The locations are the alley which is usable and a driveway that comes off North Palm. Staff feels that the use is appropriate for location based on the review criteria and supports the granting of the requested special use permit. Because this day -care facility is for ten children or less, there should be no significant impact on the surrounding neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the special use permit for ten children or less. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant, Maria Lafferty, was present. There were three objectors in attendance. Ms. Lafferty spoke and told the Commission that she has been keeping children for three years. She said that her first concern was the safety of the children and that she would like to fence in the back yard as soon as possible. She also said that she was caring for six children between the ages of six weeks and three years, but that she has kept as many as eight at one time. Ms. Lafferty said that the children were dropped off starting at 7:30 a.m. and picked up at various times in late afternoon. Kenny Scott, of the Zoning Enforcement staff, said that his office received a complaint on September 30, 1987, and an inspection of the house found seven children. Russell Lafferty, Sr. discussed the enforcement action and said the special use permit was applied for right after receiving the notice. Russell Lafferty, Jr. told the Commission that the necessary filing was done in a timely manner. Renee Norwood spoke in support of Ms. Lafferty who Ms. Norwood described as a good babysitter. Ms. Norwood also said that parking was not a problem. Gary Garrett, a neighbor, opposed the special use permit and made a long presentation. Mr. Garrett said that Ms. Lafferty did not have the right to operate the day-care and the neighborhood was against the use. He then submitted a letter from the neighborhood and reviewed their reasons for objecting the permit which included traffic, narrow street, no parking zone, safety and land values. Mr. Garrett also presented some graphics and said the day -care would impact the neighborhood. Nancy Raney told the Commission that she was violently against the special use permit and that it was causing too many problems for the neighborhood. Joe Madey, 1020 North Palm, also spoke in opposition to the request. December 1, 1987 Item No. 12 - Continued He said that a major concern was the safety of the children. Additional comments were offered by Kenny Scott, Gary Garrett and Maria Lafferty. A motion was made and approved to close the public hearing. A second motion was made to approve the special use permit with the following conditions: 1. Drop-off and pick up only in the alley. 2. Fence the back yard with a 6 foot privacy fence with outside activities restricted to fenced area. 3. Children only during designated hours (7 a.m. to 6 p.m.) and no more than 10 children including relatives. 4. No children for hire on weekends. 5. Other than the privacy fence, no other changes in the residential characteristics of Ms. Lafferty's house. The vote was 3 ayes, 8 noes and 0 absent. The special use permit was denied. December 1, 1987 Item No. 13 - Other Matters The City Board of Directors has requested an additional report from the Planning Commission concerning Z-4389-B, which was previously considered by the Planning Commission on October 27, 1987, and recommended for approval. However, at the Planning Commission meeting, no one appeared in opposition to the rezoning. At the City Board meeting on November 17, 1987, about 10 people were present in opposition and a protest petition was filed. Neighbors were concerned about the height of the proposed building to be constructed on the property and about traffic impacts upon Shackleford Road and Markham Street. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12-1-87) The applicant, Sharon Cain, was present. There were two objectors in attendance. Staff reviewed the issue and the request from the Board of Directors. Ms. Cain discussed the site and the proposed building which she said would be 70 feet high. Other persons who spoke in support of the "O-2" rezoning were Cathy Owens, Al Harkins and Mike South. George Williams, a resident of the Beverly Hills Subdivision, spoke against the "O-2" rezoning because of the permitted height of 120 feet. He also said that a mid -rise office building would add to the existing traffic problems. There was a lengthy discussion about the various issues and a number of questions were asked. A motion was then made to reaffirm the Planning Commission's first vote on October 20, 1987, unanimously supporting the "O-2" rezoning. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstention (Martha Miller). December 1, 1987 Item No.13 - Z-4389-B Owner: Alejandro Sy Applicant: Sharon Cain Location: 10900 Block of West Markham (West of Shackelford Road) Request: Rezone from "C-3" to "O-2" Purpose: Bank /Office Building Size: 5.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "C-2" South - Commercial and Industrial, Zoned "R-2" & "C-3" East - Commercial, Zoned "C-3" West - Vacant, Zoned "C-3" STAFF ANALYSIS: The proposal is to rezone 5.0 acres from "C-3" to "O-2" for a multistory office building which will include a bank's headquarters. The request is being made primarily to allow a mid -rise structure because "C-3" has a maximum height of only 35 feet. In the "O-3" District, the permitted height is 45 feet, but it allows a maximum height of 120 feet by increasing the setbacks from all the property lines. The Zoning Ordinance states that, "one foot may be added to the height of the building for each foot that the building or portion thereof is set back from the required yard lines." The site is part of the I -430 District Plan area which identifies the location for major office use, and an "O-2" reclassification is compatible with that type of development pattern. Staff's position is that the request conforms to the plan and supports the "O-2" rezoning. "O-2" is the site plan review district, so prior to a building permit being issued for the project, the site plan will have to be approved by the Planning Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "O-2" rezoning as requested. December 1, 1987 Item No. 1.1 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A motion was to recommend approval of the "O-2" rezoning as requested. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. DATEIJ,dJtl ZONING MEMBER W.Riddick, III J.Schlereth R.Massiern.m� n C :--- --c-- J.Nicholson w.Rectors.CJY" �w Ketc:l=leP T.Grace Jones O. J. Jones - R.Collins F.Perk ins ✓AYE � NAYE 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 SUBDIVISION It 6 6 I J.-3 f 0 � 7 f 9 /(J // v V v v V v v V L ,__. ,.,,,--v J,,---V v ,._,, V V v' V v v L,, v V l---' l--,._.._.,Ii A II }/ l,4 V II fJ u 1.--fl IJ. t--' f1 1/ V V v V V V V t.-{/ V 1.,.--> v ,._ 1/ V V v v ✓ V V '-' (_./ v-v L-,, v i--_ V y v v V v' ,_,)IAA V v }.,-/ L-V V V V � /V V u V V 0 V l-I-""1,,/ V v v I/✓ V v J/ � 1.-J V V v L,,--" V v L/I/ V l/ t/'I/ '-0 V V l---' V v V V V J/ u V V }/ v V" V V 2--I/u -✓ /u I/ V v' [/ L,,I L-V V v v A ADSENT �ABSTAIN loL L3 I f l � 0 t.-, 0 '--' 0 A-/1 V V v .v 0 0 v v fl. 0 V O· V 0 v December 1, 1987 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m. Date Chairman Secretary