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