Loading...
pc_08 09 1988LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE RECORD AUGUST 9, 1988 1:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A quorum was present being six in number. II. Approval of the minutes of the previous meeting. The minutes of the June 28th, 1988 meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members present: Walter Riddick, III (Acting Chairman) John Schlereth Fred Perkins Rose Collins Bill Rector John McDanieI Stephen Leek (arrived at 1:45 p.m.) Members absent: Martha Miller T. Grace Jones Jerilyn Nicholson David Jones City Attorney: Mark Stodola August 9, 1988 Item A - Z-5032 Owner: Jim Rhodes, Dean Roberts and Gary Lee Applicant: Andrew Hicks Location: Sibley Hole Road (north of Baseline Road) Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "I-2" Purpose: Office and warehouse Size: 0.27 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Arkansas Highway and Transportation Dept. Facility, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" and "I-2" STAFF ANALYSIS: A "R-2" and "I-2" rezoning change has been requested for the small parcel of land, 0.27 acres on Sibley Hole Road for the purposes of providing access to the larger "I-2" tract located to the southwest. The access is proposed to be a public street constructed across the property from Sibley Hole to the "I-2" land. Since filing the application, a slight modification has been made which involves deleting a portion of the property to the south and adding some land to the west. All this does is change to configuration of the site. It will still be used to provide access. Several years ago, the Otter Creek District Plan was amended to identify the area in question for industrial use so the "I-2" rezoning conforms to the adopted plan. The plan change was the result of the "I-2" reclassification located to the southwest. The "I-2" rezoning is a minor change and staff supports the request. The only issue of any significance is a platting matter. A plat has been filed for review but will have to be modified because of the new land area. August 9, 1988 Item No. A - Z-5032 (Continued STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "I-2" rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 28, 1988) Staff reported to the Commission that the item needed to be deferred. A motion was made to defer the request to the August 9, 1988 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred. A motion was made to defer the request to the September 20, 1988 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. August 9, 1988 Item B - Z -5038 Owner: Bill Mathis Applicant: Joe D. White Location: Highway No. 10 (east of Bella Rosa Drive) Request: Rezone form "R-2" to "C-3" and "OS" Purpose: Commercial and Open Space Size: 18.25 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Single Family, and Commercial, Zoned "R-2" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The issue is to rezone approximately 18.2 acres on Highway 10 from "R-2" to "C-3" and "OS." The property is located east of Bella Rose Drive, and the land is situated on both sides of Highway 10 with 95 percent of the property in question being south of the highway. On the north side, there is a small strip approximately one -half acre in size and the proposed rezoning is "OS." The acreage breakdown for the land is 7.55 acres for "C-3" and 10.13 acres of additional "OS" with a floodway line being the boundary between the two requested zoning districts. Existing zoning is primarily "R-2" with the exception of an "AF" tract to the east that is currently occupied by a plant nursery. Other land uses found in the vicinity are single family residences, a day care center, a church and several nonconforming uses along Highway 10. The property abuts "R-2" zoning on all sides and either single family residences or vacant land. 2. The site is vacant and Taylor Loop Creek bisects the land so there is floodplain and floodway involvement. Due to the recent rechannelization of Taylor Loop Creek, the floodplain and floodway alignments may have August 9, 1988 Item B - Z-5038 (Continued) changed. Official revision of the floodplain and floodway will have to be accomplished through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 3. Highway 10 is classified as a principal arterial which has a recommended right-of-way standard of 100 feet. The survey reflects an existing right-of-way of 80 feet so some dedication of additional right-of-way will be required. Because of being a State Highway project and close to an intersection, more right-of-way than the standard could be needed. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. Staff has received several informational calls concerning the request. 6. There is documented history on the site. 7. The most significant issue influencing the potential rezoning of this property is how the request conforms to the adopted Highway 10 Plan. The land use plan identifies the site as floodplain and floodway land so the proposed "C-3" reclassification is totally inconsistent with the direction of the plan. Even if the property is out of the floodway and floodplain due to rechannelization, the plan would not call for commercial development. At most, a transition zone would be the appropriate land use. Staff strongly believes that the plan needs to be maintained and cannot offer a positive recommendation for the proposed rezoning. Other concerns identified by the Staff are the possible adverse impact on surrounding residential uses, and the potential for a strip development pattern being established should the "C-3" request be granted. Since the adoption of the Highway 10 Plan, the City has not deviated from the Land Use Plan, and there is no reason to make an exception for the site in question. Commercial nodes are shown on the plan at the appropriate locations and sufficient land area is provided to accommodate commercial growth for the next several years. In addition, the proposed rezoning would be spot zoning. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the rezoning request as filed. August 9, 1988 Item B - Z-5038 (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 28, 1988) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a written request for a deferral to the August 9, 1988 meeting. A motion was made to defer the item to August 9, 1988 and it was approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 5 absent, and 1 abstention (David Jones). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) The applicant was represented by David Jones. There were several interested residents in attendance (the registration cards indicated two objectors and two supporters). Gary Greeson, Planning Director, recommended denial of the request based on comments made at the recent Board of Directors and Planning Commission joint meeting and stated that the plan was an important element in making the Staff's decision. Mr. Greeson went on to elaborate on the Staff's position and described other factors that were considered in the review process such as spot zoning, destroying the intent of the plan, and not an expansion of an existing commercial node. He also pointed out that the rezoning would establish undesirable precedent. Jim Lawson of the Planning Staff then reviewed denied rezoning requests along Highway 10 and presented a map showing the various locations. David Jones, representing Bill Mathis, the owner, then addressed the Commission. He first discussed a possible deferral because of a potential quorum problem with only six Commissioners present. After some discussion, the item was moved to the back of the Agenda and brought back up at 2:30 p.m. Gary Greeson reviewed the Staff recommendation and said that there would be more requests for commercial zoning along Highway 10 if this request was approved. Also, Mr. Greeson told the Commission that they needed to separate the dedication of the proposed OS area for a park from the rezoning question. Jim Lawson discussed the history of Highway 10 and the Land Use Plan. David Jones then spoke and said the rezoning was a profitable venture and indicated that there was a demand for additional commercial areas along Highway 10. He said the site was 18.5 acres total and the floodplain /floodway would change because of the proposed channelization to Taylor Loop Creek. Mr. Jones then discussed Bella Rosa Drive and said three houses would abut the commercial portion of the site. He said one of the three residences was opposed to the August 9, 1988 Item B - Z-5038 (Continued) rezoning and would like to see nothing happen. Other residences would abut the OS area. Mr. Jones also said that the owner would deed the OS area to the City once the zoning was put into place. He then presented some graphics and discussed the 10 -11 acres to be rezoned OS. At this point Mr. Jones amended the "C-3" to "C-2" and said the OS area would be restricted and the Highway 10 Transition Zone Guidelines would be used for the proposed "C-2" tract. There was some discussion about conditional zoning, and Mark Stodola, City Attorney, said conditions could be attached to the rezoning or the "C-2" Site Plan. Mr. Jones spoke again and said the property was under one ownership. He also told the Commission that the neighborhood would probably support a commercial development and that there were concerns with the Transition Zone concept because of the multifamily use. He discussed the dedication of the OS area and said it was approximately sixty percent of the land area and placed a value of approximately $200,000. There was some discussion about traffic issues and Mr. Jones said that a commercial development would not generate as much traffic as an office use during peak hours in the morning and afternoons. He also said a commercial use does not create heavy traffic loads at one time but spreads it out. Mr. Jones said that this request could not be compared to any other rezoning application on Highway 10. He said the rezoning would be for a quality development and it was a reasonable and valid request. Mr. Jones informed the Commission that the property's frontage along Highway 10 was approximately 560 feet. Mark Stodola reminded the Planning Commission not to consider the park dedication question as part of the rezoning request. There was a long discussion about the Highway 10 Plan and commercial nodes. It was pointed out that a commercial node was removed from the western end of Taylor Loop Road and placed in the Transition Zone. Frieda Vogler, a resident at the corner of Bella Rosa and Highway 10, spoke in support of the request and said the rezoning could only help the area. She also said a park was needed and it would be good for the neighborhood. August 9, 1988 Item B - Z-5038 (Continued) Ronald J. Strobel, 5005 Bella Rosa Drive, said he was against the rezoning and that it would have adverse impact on the residential uses. Mr. Strobel said that there were vacant commercial spaces in the area and asked why would the rezoning benefit the neighborhood. He also said the rezoning would add congestion and devalue property. Mr. Strobel made some additional comments about the area. Kathleen Oleson, representing the League of Women Voters, objected to the procedure and allowing David Jones to present the application at the Agenda Meeting and the Public Hearing. David Jones said that he had checked with the City Attorney's office and there were no problems with him representing the request before the Planning Commission. Mark Stodola also responded to the concerns expressed by Ms. Oleson and said it was appropriate for Mr. Jones to present the item because he had made a full disclosure of his involvement with the request. There were additional comments made by Gary Greeson and David Jones. Mr. Greeson said that the request needed to be judged on its benefits to the community as a whole and not how many immediate neighbors supported it. Mr. Jones said the issue was a matter of land use and the request made good sense because the property was unique. Mr. Jones also indicated that there was no specific development plan and the rezoning was an opportunity to maintain the park -like corridor of Highway 10. There was a long discussion about the plan and comments were made about various issues. A motion was then made to recommend approval of "C-2" as amended and OS for 10 -11 acres with Transition Zone Guidelines for the "C-2" area subject to completion of the required hydrological studies for channelizing Taylor Loop Creek. The vote was 3 ayes, 4 noes, and 4 absent. The item was automatically deferred to the August 23, 1988 meeting because of failing to receive a majority vote of the Commission. August 9, 1988 Item No. 1 - Z-4092-C Owner: Chester Phillips and Robert M. Cearley, Jr. Applicant: Robert M. Cearley, Jr. Location: Pleasant Ridge Road and Fairview Road Request: Rezone from "MF-18" to "R-3" Purpose: Single family Size: 6.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "PRD" South - Single family, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "MF-6" West - Vacant, Zoned "PRD" STAFF ANALYSIS: The request before the Commission is to rezone the property from "MF-18" to "R-3." If the rezoning is granted, the proposal is to develop a small lot, single family subdivision. The site is currently platted into large lots so the parcel will have to be replatted into new lots to accommodate the proposed project. No street construction will be required because the roads are in place, completed as part of the existing plat. Zoning in the area is a mix of residential and nonresidential including "R-2," "MF-6," "MF-18," "O-2," "O-3," "C-1" "C-2," and "PRD." The land use pattern is primarily residential with several substantial multi - family developments along Pleasant Ridge Road and a major subdivision, Pleasant Forest, located to the south. Other single family residences are located to the north and east. To the southeast, there is an Easter Seals facility and a non - conforming use. Undeveloped land is also found in the area and two large vacant tracts abut the property in question on the north and west sides. History on the site dates back to 1983 when the property was rezoned to "MF-12." In 1985, an "O-3" application was filed but after being on the agenda for several months, it was August 9, 1988 Item No. 1 - Z-4092-C finally withdrawn from consideration. The last rezoning action occurred in 1986 when the site was rezoned to its current status of "MF-18." Staff's position is that the proposal is compatible with the neighborhood and supports the request. The Highway 10 Plan identifies the site as part of a large multi - family area, but rezoning the property under consideration for a single family project should not alter the direction of the Plan or impact other developments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "R-3" request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) The applicant was present. There were no objectors. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "R-3" zoning as requested. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. August 9, 1988 Item No. 2 - Z-5039 Owner: Vee- Esther Armstead Applicant: Denise Armstead Location: 7603 Jamison Road Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "C-3" Purpose: Private club Size: 3.9 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant and single family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" West - Office and industrial, Zoned "I-2" STAFF ANALYSIS: The request is to rezone the site from "R-2" to "C-3" for a private club. The property is located south of 1 -30 and in an area that is either zoned "R-2" or "I-2." Predominate land uses in the area are office, light industrial, and the City of Little Rock's Maintenance facility. There is a single family residence on the property directly to the north and some of the land is vacant. To the south on Jamison Road, there is a small single family pocket, but it is somewhat removed from the property in question and will not be impacted by the "C-3" rezoning. Even though the apparent direction of the area is light industrial because of the existing zoning and land use, a "C-3" reclassification should not have any effect on the area or future development patterns. Staff feels that a "C-3" rezoning is a reasonable option for the property and supports the request. The Geyer Springs East District Plan shows the general vicinity for industrial uses and, in the past, the City has usually supported a mix "C-3," "C-4," and "I-2" for similar areas. There appears to be some floodway involvement in the rear of the property so this area will have to be zoned "OS" and dedicated to the City. Engineering will have to confirm the floodway area and determine the exact amount of dedication. August 9, 1988 Item No. 2 - Z -5039 (Continued) TAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of "C -3" and "OS" for the established floodway. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) The applicant, Denise Armstead, was present. There were no objectors. Staff reported that the City's Engineering Office estimated that the floodway was the eastern 860 - 880 feet of the site. Ms. Armstead addressed the Commission and said that she had problems with the floodway, specifically the size and having to dedicate so much land area. Jerry Gardner of the City's Engineering Staff discussed the floodway and said it could not be filled and that it had to be left in its natural state; no construction of any type was allowed in the floodway. Various individuals made additional comments about the floodway and required dedication. Ms. Armstead told the Commission that she would like to use some of the floodway area for the proposed development. A motion was made to recommend approval of "C-3" and OS for the established floodway subject to dedication of the floodway area to the City. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 5 absent. August 9, 1988 Item No. 3 - Z-5043 Owner: E. K. & V. M. Anderson Applicant: E. K. Anderson Location: 10205 Rockwood Road Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "I-2" Purpose: Office and lab (with storage) Size: 2.25 acres Existing Use: Office and lab (with storage) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Multifamily, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Church, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" LANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The property in question is located on Rockwood Road which is off of Stagecoach Road and the issue is to rezone 2.25 acres from "R-2" to "I-2." The site is currently an engineering office with a testing lab (a nonconforming use). The proposal is to add another building for storage purposes and to accomplish this, a rezoning must be approved because of expanding a nonconforming use. ( "I-2" was selected as the appropriate district because, at the time of filing the application, the owner described some of the property as a contractor's storage yard.) The company does soils and geological testing so there is equipment necessary to perform the work and the owner would like to have a safe storage area. Surrounding zoning is "R-2" with some "O-3" on Stagecoach Road, and on Shackleford Road to the north there is a large ""I-1" area primarily zoned for a major maintenance facility for the Water and Waste Water utilities. Land use includes single family, multifamily, a church and seminary, nursing home, office, and industrial. Some of the existing nonresidential uses are nonconforming. The site abuts vacant land on the west and south sides with the church on the east and some multifamily units (housing for the seminary) to the north. August 9, 1988 Item No. 3 - Z-5043 (Continued) 2. The site has one building on it and some of the area is paved for parking. The existing structure is situated right on the east property line. 3. There are no right -of -way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with the request. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history or neighborhood position on the site. 7. The adopted plan, 65th Street West, recommends a multifamily land use for the general area, including the property under consideration. To the east of the site, the Plan recognizes an existing church and related uses by identifying the north and south sides of Rockwood as Public /Institutional. Additional multifamily areas are shown to the north along both sides of Shackleford Road. Recommended nonresidential locations are shown along Stagecoach Road and Shackleford Road, which is a large light industrial area. The existing industrial area along Shackleford Road is more than adequate to meet the demands of the area and establishing another industrial pocket could have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. After careful review of the request, Staff has determined that "I-2" is not needed for the property and "O-3" is suitable for what the owner is proposing. Because of the location and the existing uses, Staff feels that "O-3" is more appropriate than "I-2" and supports an "O-3" reclassification. The use has been in place for a number of years without impacting the area and is compatible with the existing uses to the east. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of "O-3" and not "I-2" as requested. August 9, 1988 Item No. 3 - Z-5043 (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) The applicant, Edward Anderson, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Anderson said he had no problems with an "O-3" reclassification and amended the request from "I-2" to "O-3." A motion was made to recommend approval of "O-3" as amended. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. August 9, 1988 Item No. 4 - Z-5044 Owner: John G. and Nancy T. Pratt Applicant: John G. Pratt Location: 12705 Alexander Road Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "I-2" Purpose: Industrial Size: 4.95 acres Existing Use: Industrial SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant and single family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant and single family, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The property under consideration is a nonconforming use and the proposal is to either add an additional building or expand an existing structure. Before any expansion can occur, the Ordinance requires that a rezoning action must be first approved, and to help implement the proposed plans, the owner has filed a rezoning request from "R-2" to "I-2." Land use in the Alexander Road /Vimy Road vicinity is a mix of single family, some commercial, and industrial with a majority of industrial uses found north of Alexander Road and East of Vimy Ridge Road. There are several other nonconforming uses including a commercial establishment at the northwest corner of Alexander and Vimy Ridge Roads. Zoning is either "R-2" or "I-2" with a high percentage of the "I-2" lands still vacant. Currently the "I-2" is restricted to the north of Alexander Road and east of Vimy Ridge Road with no industrial zoning intrusions south and west of the Alexander /Vimy Ridge intersection. 2. The site is occupied by three structures which are all involved with industrial use, the manufacturing of burial vaults. The land is relatively flat and there are no unique physical features. August 9, 1988 Item No. 4 - Z-5044 (Continued) 3. Alexander Road is classified as a minor arterial on the current Master Street Plan, so it appears that dedication of additional right -of -way will be required. Engineering will make the final determination on the amount of dedication for Alexander Road. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history or neighborhood position on the site. 7. The Otter Creek District Plan identifies the southwest quadrant of the Alexander /Vimy Ridge Road intersection as "mixed residential" which encourages a combination of single family and multifamily units at a density of 4 -8 units per acre. Recommended industrial locations are consistent with the existing industrial zoning and by doing this the Plan has reinforced Alexander Road as the line separating the residential and industrial areas. There is an area south of Alexander Road that is shown for industrial use but it is east of Vimy Ridge Road. Staff's position is that the existing zoning line should be maintained and cannot offer a positive recommendation for the "I-2" reclassification. The area to the southwest of the Vimy Ridge /Alexander Road intersection is still primarily residential in terms of land use and allowing an industrial rezoning could have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. There is an ample supply of industrially zoned land in the general vicinity and there is no justification for expanding the industrial base into a new area. There are some new subdivisions under construction to the south and Staff is concerned with an uncontrolled growing industrial area and what effects it would have on the residential uses. And finally, the property is nonconforming, so the use can continue to operate at its current level. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "I-2" rezoning as requested. August 9, 1988 Item No. 4 - Z-5044 (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) The applicant was represented by Cathy Graves. There was one objector in attendance. Gary Greeson, Planning Director, indicated that some expansion could be accomplished by a Conditional Use Permit after the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments were approved by the Board of Directors because one amendment allows up to a twenty -five percent expansion of nonconforming uses. There was some discussion about the proposed amendment and how it would affect the property in question. Cathy Graves then spoke and submitted some information to the Commission. Ms. Graves said the business located on Alexander Road twenty -four years ago because it had to move from its previous location. She said the five acres were purchased to allow for future growth and the business currently employes twenty -three persons. She went on to say that the operation has been an on -going business and that it has not hindered residential development in the area. Ms. Graves also said the company has made a commitment to the area and will not have an impact either. She explained that the business needed additional storage, not outside, and she thought there would be problems with a one -time expansion through a Conditional Use Permit as proposed by the Zoning Ordinance amendment. Jim Lawson of the Planning Staff discussed the Otter Creek District Plan and said the existing zoning lines were recognized on the Land Use Plan. He said that Alexander Road was a reasonable buffer because of being a minor arterial. Ms. Graves responded to some of Mr. Lawson's comments about the plan. James Johnson, a supporter of the request, discussed Alexander Road and asked several questions. Ms. Graves also made several comments about Alexander Road. There was a long discussion about the Land Use Plan and Alexander Road. Jim Conner, representing the owners of 60 acres directly to the south, spoke in opposition to the "I-2" rezoning. He said the plan was to utilize the 60 acres for a residential development and that an "I-2" reclassification would have an impact on the area. Mr. Conner described the property in question as unsightly and said that he would want a landscape buffer along the rear property line should some type of industrial zoning be granted. Ms. Graves said that some storage was occurring in the back of the property. August 9, 1988 Item No. 4 - Z-5044 (Continued There was some discussion about the Otter Creek District Plan. Staff said that several options were considered when the plan was first being developed and they could take another look at the plan. Ms. Graves suggested that the industrial line could be drawn south of Alexander Road. Comments were offered by several Commissioners and some indicated a specific plan for the site would be beneficial. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "I-2" rezoning as requested. The vote was 0 ayes, 5 noes, 4 absent, and 2 abstentions (Rose Collins and John McDaniel). The item was automatically deferred to the August 23, 1988 meeting because of failing to receive six votes for approval or denial. August 9, 1988 Item No. 5 - Z-5051-A Owner: B, H and G Properties Applicant: William R. Kremer Location: Kanis Road (one block west of John Barrow Road) Request: Rezone from "C-4" to "O-3" Purpose: Office building Size: 1.57 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Commercial, Zoned "C-3" South - Single family and office, Zoned "R-2" and "C-3" East - Commercial, Zoned "C-4" West - Office, Zoned "O-3" STAFF ANALYSIS: The request is to rezone a tract of land on Kanis Road from "C-4" to "O-3" for an office building, a doctor's office. The property is situated just west of John Barrow Road and in an area that has a diverse zoning pattern. Some of the existing zoning includes "R-2," "R-5," "O-3," and "C-3." Land use is very similar to zoning with a mix of office and commercial with some residential uses. "C-4" does allow professional office but the applicant is of the opinion than an "O-3" zoning is more appropriate for the proposed use which also includes an out - patient clinic. Medical clinics are not specifically listed in the "C-4" district. Staff agrees with the applicant and supports the "O-3" reclassification. There are no outstanding issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "O-3" request as filed. August 9, 1988 Item No. 5 - Z-5051-A (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a written request for a withdrawal. A motion was made to withdraw the item from consideration. The motion was approved by a vote of 0 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. August 9, 1988 Item No. 6 - Z-5056 Owner: Al Porter Applicant: Al Porter Location: 2804 Peyton Street Request: Rezone from "R-3" to "C-1" Purpose: Single family and food store Size: 0.3 acres Existing Use: Single family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single family, Zoned "R-3" South - Single family, Zoned "R-3" East - Single family, Zoned "R-3" West - Single family, Zoned "R-3" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The owner of 2804 Peyton Street applied for a Privilege License to operate a small business out of his residence. The license was denied because of the residential zoning and the applicant was instructed to file a commercial rezoning request, "R-3" to "C-1." The site is approximately 2 1/2 blocks north of Asher Avenue in an area that is primarily residential in terms of land use. To the south and southeast, the zoning is a mix of "O-3," "C-3," and "I-2" with the commercial and industrial zoning being restricted to lots between West 29th Street and Asher Avenue. The nearest nonresidential zoning to the property in question is the half block north of West 29th and east of Peyton that is zoned "O-3;" all the "O-3" lots along West 29th are occupied by residential uses. North and west of the lot the zoning is "R-3" but there are some isolated locations zoned for commercial purposes. Land use around 2804 Peyton is residential and the nonresidential uses are located closer to Asher Avenue. The existing "O-3" line north of West 29th has been in place for many years and has established a definite zoning boundary between residential and nonresidential uses. August 9, 1988 Item No. 6 - Z-5056 (Continued) 2. The site is an 87' x 150' lot with one single family residence and an accessory structure on it. 3. There are no right -of -way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history of neighborhood position on the site. 7. As with other commercial rezoning efforts in older residential neighborhoods, Staff has a number of concerns with the current request and is opposed to the proposed "C-1" rezoning. The surrounding neighborhood appears to be fairly stable and a commercial reclassification could have a negative impact on the area and lead to other undesirable rezonings. In this type of neighborhood, the potential for long-term damage to the area is too great and outweighs any short term benefits or justifications for the proposed rezoning. Finally, the "C-1" rezoning is in conflict with the adopted Oak Forest Neighborhood Plan which maintains the residential character of the area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "C-1" rezoning request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) Staff reported that the rezoning request needed to be deferred. A motion was made to defer the item to the September 20, 1988 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. AUGUST 9, 1988 Item No. 7 - Other Matters /Covenant Release NAME: Joseph L. Ehrler, General Partner of Rock Creek Limited /Owner LOCATI „ON: 500 Napa Valley Drive described as the Calais Forest Apartments (2.16 acres, more or less) SUBJECT: A request by Mr. Ehrler for release of the covenants placed of record in October 1977 as part of the land use plan for Rock Creek. The covenants run with the title and become an issue on each occasion of title transfer. The Architectural Control Committee established by the covenants has never been fully operational and, in fact, disbanded shortly after appointment. The only purpose of the covenants is to carry out the plan as conceived by the original development group. Its release on this site will affect no other properties. The covenant provides that the owner shall file the deletion or amending instrument at his cost after receiving Planning Commission approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff recommends approval of the removal of this covenant. However, we would like to point out that there are numerous properties within Rock Creek which contain a similar restriction. It will become necessary over a number of years as these properties are developed to bring each one to the Commission for release as necessary. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) There were no objectors in attendance. The Applicant was present. The Commission briefly discussed the proposal, then placed the item on the Consent Agenda. The Consent Agenda was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 5 absent. August 9, 1988 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Date. Chairman Secretary