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