pc_08 27 1985LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTE RECORD
AUGUST 27, 1985
1:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A quorum was present being 9 in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
The minutes were approved as mailed.
III. Members Present: Jerilyn Nicholson
William Ketcher
Bill Rector
Dorothy Arnett
Richard Massie
John Schlereth
David Jones
Jim Summerlin
Ida Boles
Members Absent: Betty Sipes
John Clayton
City Attorney: Pat Benton
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
Next Month's Meeting Dates:
Filing Date: 8-26-85
Planning Commission Meeting: 9-24-85
Board of Directors Meeting: 9-17-85
August 27, 1985
Item No. A - Z-3592-C
Owner: Dr. W. Wise
Applicant: J.E. Hathaway, Jr.
Location: South of Kanis and East of Bowman
Request: Rezone from "R-2" and "MF-6" to
"MF-12," "MF-18" and "O-3"
Purpose: Multifamily and Office
Size: 100 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Mixed, Zoned "R-2"
South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
East - Vacant and Office, Zoned "O-2" and "O-3"
West - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The proposal before the Planning Commission is to
rezone a portion of a 100-acre site west of the
existing Koger Executive Centre for office and
multifamily development. There are four parcels that
involve the following acreage:
Parcel A "R-2" to "O-3" 5.6 acres
Parcel B "MF-6" to "MF-18" 21.1 acres
Parcel C "R-2" to "MF-12" 12.5 acres
Parcel D "R-2 to "MF-12" 31.1 acres
(The parcel designations correspond to those on the
accompanying zoning sketch.) The site is situated in a
section of west Little Rock, the I-430 Corridor, that
is experiencing significant growth and development.
This is created in part by the area's accessibility to
the interstate system and the general location. The
primary land use is still residential with a majority
of the land being zoned "R-2." This is due to some of
the area just recently coming into the City as part of
the referendum area. Along both Kanis and Bowman
Roads, the land use pattern is more mixed with
nonconforming office and commercial uses. The most
significant rezoning change that has occurred in
August 27, 1985
Item No. A - Continued
the immediate area is directly to the east of the
property in question and involves large tracts zoned
"O-2," "O-3" and "C-2." Development is taking place on
the "O-2" parcel, but there are sites still vacant.
There are no significant multifamily projects in the
area, but two developments were recently approved by
the City. One is east of I-430 and the second one is
to the northwest of the intersection of Kanis and
Bowman Roads.
2. The site is vacant and heavily wooded. The property
does have some significant topography on it with
certain locations increasing in elevation between 60
and 90 feet.
3. The Master Street Plan identifies three new collectors
through the vicinity, so dedication of right-of-way for
those streets will be required. One is an extension of
the existing Executive Centre Drive that will connect
with Bowman Road. Another collector is proposed to tie
into Hickory Hill and a third one is located along the
east side of the property in question. Dedication of
right-of-way will also be required for both Kanis and
Bowman Roads.
4. No adverse comments have been reported by the reviewing
agencies as of this writing.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. There is no documented neighborhood position on the
site. Some of the property was recently annexed into
the City through the annexation referendum that was
upheld by the State Supreme Court.
7. Staff's position is one of general support for the
proposed concept with the exception of the zoning
request to "MF-12" for Parcel D. The I-430 Plan does
not identify that tract for multifamily development,
and the multifamily line should remain to the north as
shown on the plan. If a multifamily project is
proposed in the future, staff feels that a "PRD" is
more appropriate for this particular site. Staff
supports "O-3" for Parcel A as requested but recommends
"MF-12" not "MF-18" for Parcel B and "MF-6" for
Parcel C. "MF-12" should be the maximum density
allowed for this area. The stepping down of densities
has been utilized in other locations when there is a
single family subdivision in close proximity.
August 27, 1985
Item No. A - Continued
This zoning pattern will maintain the I-430 Plan for
the most part.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "O-3" request as filed,
"MF-12" for Parcel B and "MF-6" for Parcel C. At this time,
staff recommends denial of "MF-12" for Parcel D.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff informed the Planning Commission that a written
request for a 30-day deferral had been submitted. A motion
was made to defer the item to the July 30, 1985, meeting.
The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and
1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (7-30-85)
The applicant submitted a request for a second deferral of
this matter. The Commission was advised by staff that the
owner had failed to mail notices to adjacent property owners
as required. The Commission voted unanimously to defer this
case to the August 27, 1985, hearing. The vote 7 ayes,
0 noes, 4 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (8-27-85)
Staff informed the Planning Commission that the applicant
had submitted a letter requesting that the rezoning be
withdrawn without prejudice. Linda Shepherd, representing
the Sand Piper Property Owners' Association, then addressed
the withdrawal request. She asked that the item be
withdrawn from the agenda with prejudice. Ms. Shepherd then
discussed the bylaws and said the applicant should have to
wait one year to refile a rezoning application. She
specifically asked if Subsection 8 of the bylaws had been
followed. Don Chambers, representing James Hathaway, then
spoke. He presented some background and history on the
property. Mr. Chambers told the Commission that the
required property owners had not been notified and requested
that the item be withdrawn without prejudice.
Linda Shepherd spoke again. A motion was then made to
accept the withdrawal request. The motion passed by a vote
of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. B - Z-4465
Owner: Richard Easterly
Applicant: Truman Ball
Location: 3023 Ware (West 31st Street and
Ware - Northeast Corner)
Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "R-4"
Purpose: Duplex
Size: 0.16 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant
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-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request before the Planning Commission is to rezone
a single lot for a duplex. The property is located
west of University Avenue and north of Asher in an area
that is primarily single family with a scattering of
duplexes to the north and south. The existing duplexes
are all nonconforming. Other land uses in the
immediate vicinity also include churches and two
schools to the south on West 32nd. The zoning is all
"R-2" with the exception of a five-block "R-3" pocket
to the east. The area appears to be stable, and the
properties are well maintained for the most part, which
usually indicates a high percentage of owner occupied
units. The primary issues with this request are the
appropriateness of rezoning a single lot and the
potential effect on the other properties in the
neighborhood.
2. The site is a typical 50-foot residential lot and is
vacant.
3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues involved with this request.
August 27, 1985
Item No. B - Continued
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 neighborhood position or history
on the site.
7. The rezoning, if granted, would create a spot zoning,
and staff could not support that type of zoning
pattern. Because of that and the Boyle Park Plan which
identifies the area for continued single family use,
staff is opposed to the rezoning request. The zoning
has been maintained over the years, and approving this
"R-4" request would have an adverse impact on the
neighborhood being the first non-single family
rezoning. Undesirable precedent could be set by
approving the change, and it could have a disruptive
influence over the neighborhood. Another concern that
staff has is the width of the lot - 50 feet. The
Zoning Ordinance does recommend that an "R-4" lot not
be less than 70 feet which staff feels is an adequate
width. The 50-foot width appears to be too narrow, but
because of this being a previously platted lot, a
rezoning action can take place on it.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "R-4" request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. Staff informed the Planning
Commission that the item needed to be deferred because of
the required notification of property owners had not been
completed. A motion to defer the request to the July 30,
1985, meeting was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and
1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (7-30-85)
This applicant remains uncertain about the continuation of
this petition. A deferral was requested until August 27th
with the thought that the owner may withdraw this
application in its entirety and pursue other uses. The
Commission voted unanimously to defer the application to the
August 27, 1985, agenda. The vote - 7 ayes, 0 noes,
4 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. B - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (8-27-85)
Staff recommended that the item be withdrawn. A motion was
made to withdraw the rezoning request. The motion was
approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 1 - Z-1791-A
Owner:
Applicant:
Landscape Associates, In .
R. Wingfield Martin
Location: Candlewood Subdivision - 1/4 mile
north and 1/4 mile east of Cantrell
Road and Pinnacle Valley Road
Intersection
Request: Rezone from "R-5" Urban Residence
to "C -3" General Commercial
Purpose: Commercial Development
Size: 4.04 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "R-4"
South - Vacant, Zoned "C-3"
East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
West - Vacant, Zoned "R-5"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request is to rezone 4+ acres to "C-3" for an
unspecificed commercial use. The property is located
approximately 800+ feet north of Highway 10 and will
have frontage on Candlewood Drive should it ever be
constructed. The site being removed from Highway 10
does not lend itself to being a viable commercial
location. Even if the nro-- ty is proposed to be
developed in conjunction with the "C-3" tract to the
south, the desirability of extending commercial zoning
this far north of Highway 10 is questionable. In the
immediate area, a majority of the land is still vacant,
including the existing "C-3" parcel. Development in
this area includes single family residential, some
minor commercial uses and a 1 rge mini-storage complex
on the south side of Highway 10. Because of the
existing "C-3" being undeveloped for the most part, it
appears that the need for additional commercially zoned
l -nd is not present.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 1 - Continued
2. The site is vacant and increases in elevation from
south to north. The northern portion of the parcel has
slopes between 15 and 30 percent.
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 neighborhood position on the
site. The rezonings that were accomplished through
File No. Z -1791 occurred approximately 20 years ago.
7. The adopted Suburban Development Plan identifies the
tract to the south for commercial development but does
not recommend commercial use north of the existing
"C-3" zoning line. Because of the plan and a recent
plan change to establish the Highway 10 and Taylor Loop
Road intersection for commercial development, staff is
opposed to the rezoning. With the Taylor Loop location
and the existing "C-3" directly to the south, there
appears to an adequate amount of land designated for
commercial use. In addition to those areas, there is a
65 -acre "C-2" tract further west than Highway 10. The
demand for more commercial land has been established.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "C-3" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Wingfield Martin, was present. There were
two persons in attendance who expressed an interest in the
case. Mr. Martin spoke and amended the application to "O-2"
and not "C-3" as originally filed. He then presented a
proposed plan for the Candlewood Development and pointed out
the substantial grade differences in the general area.
Chris Thomas, a resident in Candlewood, then spoke. He
requested additional information about the specifics of the
development. David Werling, representing the Candlewood/
Walton Heights Property Owners' Association, wanted to know
what assurances the residents had that the development would
take place as proposed. There was discussion about the
necessary site plan review because of the amended request to
"O-2." The Planning Commission then voted to recommend
approval of "O-2" as amended. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and
3 absent.
August 7, 1985
Item No. 2 - Z-4512
Owner: Robert I. Shaheen and
Curtis E. Goodfellow
Applicant: R. Wingfield Martin
Location: Candlewood Subdivision - 1/4 mile
east and 1/4 mile north of the
Intersection of Cantrell Road
and Pinnacle Valley Road
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family
to "MF-12" Multifamily
Purpose: Multifamily
Size: 20.69 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" and "R-4"
South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
West - Vacant, Zoned "R-5" and "C-3"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The proposal is to rezone this 20+ acre tract to
"MF-12." No specific development plans have been
submitted at this time. The property is located north
of Highway 10 and east of the "C-3" request - Item
No. 1 on this agenda. The site is landlocked and has
no access to a developed street. The surrounding area
is primarily v -ant with some single family development
to the north, the Walton Heights / Candlewood
neighborhood. To the west, there is some "R-4" and
"R-5" zoning in place but undeveloped. The zoning to
the south, north and east is "R-2" with a small "R-4"
parcel on the northwest side. The property also abuts
some "C-3" land along the west property line. Because
of the location, the site is not suitable for
multifamily development at this time.
2. The site is vacant and heavily wooded. Som- -f the
property has slo -es between 15 and 30 percent with
certain locations along the north boundary exceeding 30
percent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 2 - Continued
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 neighborhood or history on this
site.
7. The "MF-12" rezoning is in conflict with the Suburban
Development Plan, and staff cannot support the request.
The plan recognizes locations to the west and east
along Highway 10 for higher density residential
development. Staff feels that the currently identified
sites are more appropriate. In the immediate vicinity
of this request, the plan recommends some commercial to
the southwest and the remainder for single family use.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "MF-12" rezoning request as
filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Wingfield Martin, was present. There were
two interested persons in attendance. Mr. Martin reviewed
the rezoning proposal and a tentative site plan. There was
a long discussion about the proposed density. Chris Thomas
asked about the densities and how the rezoning would impact
the single family area to the north. After additional
comments, Mr. Martin amended the application to "MF-6" and
"OS" for that portion of the property lying northeast of the
existing utility easement with the provision for density
transfer from the "OS" area to the "MF-6" tract. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the
request as amended to "MF-6" and "OS." The vote: 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 3 - Z -4509
Owner: Charles J. and Mary A. Ready
Applicant: Mary A. Ready
Location: 100 Rice Street
Request: Rezone from "R-3" Single Family
to "R-5" Urban Residence
Purpose: Multifamily
Size: 6750 square feet
Existing Use: Multifamily
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Public, Zoned "R-2"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R-3"
East - Single Family, Zoned "R-3"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-3"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. This issue is before the Planning Commission as a
result of action taken by the City's Enforcement
Division. The structure was a legal nonconforming use
with three units in it. At some point, there was a
fire that heavily damaged the building. When the
previous owner rebuilt the interior, he converted the
attic into a fourth unit, thus, expanding a
nonconforming structure without first trying to obtain
the necessary zoning. An attempt was made to obtain
a fourth utility meter, and that was how the City
became aware of the expansion issue. The lot is
located on the south side of West Markham across from
the Schools for the Deaf and Blind. The immediate
neighborhood is made up of primarily single family
units, but there are also some two and three -unit
structures. The zoning is "R-3" with a few lots zoned
"R-4" and one "R-5" parcel within a block of the
property in question. Further to the east,
approximately two blocks away, the area includ -s more
"R-5" and some "R-6" but appears to be less stable than
the neighborhood around Rice Street. Some land east of
Barton is still vacant and is close to the MOPAC
Railroad tracks.
2. The site is occupied by one two -story frame structure.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 3 - Continued
3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
4. Engineering has stated that parking lot improvements
are needed on the site. There have been no comments
received from the other reviewing agencies.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. Staff has received one call objecting to the rezoning.
The only history on the site has been enforcement
action.
7. In the past, staff has tried to discourage single lot
rezonings in older neighborhoods to permit higher
densities. With this case, the staff position remains
the same and opposes the "R-5" zoning. Staff
recognizes the existing three units but feels that an
"R-5" reclassification could have an adverse impact on
the neighborhood and establish precedent for similar
zonings. The current mix of "R-3" and "R-4" zoning
seems to be working and should be maintained.
Conversion of existing structures to two units is
desirable, but allowing "R-5" zoning, the possibility
of removing structures to accommodate more unit units
becomes a concern. The buildings with three or four
units should be left as nonconforming uses if they have
not been rezoned. This area is part of the Woodruff
School Neighborhood Plan which recognizes the
neighborhood for single family use and does not
advocate higher densities for this location. The plan
recommends multifamily development /zoning further to
the east.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "R-5" request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present and represented by Ben McMinn, an
attorney. There were no objectors. Mr. McMinn spoke and
presented some background on the property and the
enforcement matter. Kenny Scott of the City's Enforcement
Division then discussed the installation of a fourth utility
meter which expanded the existing nonconforming use and
created the enforcement issue. He stated that the structure
had three legal units. Mike Batie of the Engineering staff
discussed the parking and access concerns. There was a long
discussion about the various issues. The Planning
Commission then voted on the rezoning as filed. The vote:
0 ayes, 8 noes, 2 absent and 1 abstention (David Jones).
The request was denied.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 4 - Z-4504
Owner: Dixie Knight
Applicant: Same
Location: 124 N. Spruce Street
Request: Rezone from "R3" Single Family
to "R-5" Urban Residence
Purpose: Convert Garage into Apartment
Size: 7000 square feet
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 request is to rezone the lot to "R-5" to allow the
conversion of the existing garage into a residential
unit. The "R-5" reclassification is necessary because
the two units, if approved, would be detached. The lot
is located north of West Markham in a neighborhood that
is still single family with the exception of certain
properties fronting West Markham. Along West Markham,
there is a mix of residential, office and commercial
uses with the appropriate zoning. North of West
Markham, the zoning is "R-3" with a "PRD" west of North
Monroe. Between West Markham and Lee Streets, west of
Monroe for at least four blocks, there is no "R-4" or
"R-5" zoning in the neighborhood. In this block, there
are a number of lots that have Accessory structures on
the alley, but it appears that a majority of them are
used for storage and as garages or a combination of the
two.
2. The site is a typical residential lot with a single
famil 11 ture and garage on it.
3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 4 - Continued
4. Engineering reports that parking and access should be
provided. No other comments have been received from
the reviewing agencies.
5. A possible legal issue associated with this request is
one of spot zoning.
6. There is no documented neighborhood position or history
on the site.
7. This area is part of the Heights /Hillcrest Plan which
recommends single family use only for the neighborhood.
Because of the plan and the issue of spot zoning, staff
is opposed to the "R-5" rezoning. Another concern is
the property's ability to provide the necessary
off - street parking. Because of the location of the
structure, it appears that it will be somewhat
difficult. The "R-5" change could have an adverse
impact on the neighborhood by establishing precedent
for additional rezonings. The area is stable, but a
gradual shift to higher densities through rezoning
changes could be a disruptive influence for the
neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "R-5" request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Dixie Knight, was present. There were no
objectors. Ms. Knight spoke and explained her reasons for
requesting the rezoning change. She said she wanted to
generate some extra income and that the apartment would not
be used as a rental unit forever. Staff stated that they
had received one call and one letter objecting to the
rezoning. There was a long discussion about several of the
issues. The Planning Commission then voted on the request
as filed. The vote: 1 aye, 7 noes and 3 absent. The "R-5"
rezoning was denied.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 5 - Z-3238-A
Owner: Troy Braswell
Applicant: Greg Nomland
By: Steve Bonds
Location: 10801 Fairview Road
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family
to "C-3" General Commercial
Purpose: Commercial Development
Size: 3.3 acres ±
Existing Use: Skating Rink
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "MF-6" and "MF-12"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
East - Vacant and Commercial, Zoned "R-2" and "O-3"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The proposal is to rezone the tract to "C-3" for a
commercial development. Currently, there is a skating
rink which is nonconforming on the property, but it is
unknown whether the rink will remain or be replaced
with a new use. There has been some discussion about a
teen center as a possible use. The site is located
west of Rodney Parham and south of Highway 10 in a
pocket that has a fairly mixed zoning and land use
pattern. The zoning includes "R-2, "MF-6," "MF-12,"
"O-3" and "PCD." Th land is similar with
nonresidential uses to the east and the developed
residential primarily to the west and south. Adjacent
to the property on the east side is a nonconforming
commercial use. To the north, the land is undeveloped
and zoned for residential uses. The site abuts single
family residential on the west and south sides. The
land is somewhat isolated because of the existing
development pattern to be considered is a viable "C-3"
location.
2. The site is occupied by a single structure and a large
parking area.
3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 5 - Continued
4. Engineering has provided the following comments:
(1) Complete sidewalk on Fairview Road.
(2) Leave access to site at existing driveway with no
entrance to Fairview Road.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. A commercial rezoning was applied for in 1978, and it
was denied by the Planning Commission. At that time,
there was substantial opposition to the request from
the surrounding neighborhoods. A petition with
approximately 70 signatures was submitted to the
Planning Commission. Staff has not received any
comments regarding the current proposal.
7. Staff's position is that the "C-3" rezoning could have
an adverse impact on the neighborhood and does not
support the request. Because of the direct
relationship to single family uses in the area, a
commercial zoning of the property could create a number
of problems for the residents. In addition, the
Suburban Development Plan does not identify the
location for commercial development. The property is
also removed from more viable commercial locations and
has a relatively poor access.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of "C-3" request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Greg Nomland, was present. There were
approximately 15 objectors also in attendance. Mr. Nomland
spoke and stated that he was proposing to convert the
existing building into a teen club. After some additional
comments, Mr. Nomland requested a 30 -day deferral. The 15
or so persons present indicated that they were opposed to
the deferral request. Clyde Bayless, a resident of the
owner, spoke against the rezoning. He said that the current
use had caused too many problems, such as traffic, and
because of that situation, the new proposal was not a good
idea. Another resident discussed a number of issues. He
was very concerned with the various uses permitted in the
"C-3" district. Mr. Nomland said that they would like to
explore some other options and that was the primary reason
for requesting the deferral. Diane Robbins voiced her
August 27, 1985
Item No. 5 - Continued
opposition to the "C-3" rezoning and said that the use
should be something that is more compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission then
voted on the deferral request. The vote was: 2 ayes, 6
noes and 3 absent. The request was denied. The Planning
Commission voted on the "C-3" rezoning as filed. The vote:
0 ayes, 8 noes and 3 absent. The "C-3" application was
denied.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 6 - Z-2477-A
Owner: Greater Christ Temple
Applicant: Carl Phillips
Location: NW Corner of W. 13th at Abigail St.
Request: Rezone from "R-3" Single Family
and "C-3" General Commercial to
"MF-24" Multifamily
Purpose: Multifamily
Size: 0.4 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "C-3"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R-3"
East - Church, Zoned "C-3"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-3"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request is to rezone approximately a one -half acre
site to "MF-24" to permit development of a multifamily
project. The proposal is to construct a single
building, two stories with a total of 12 units. The
necessary parking and landscaping will be provid -d.
The property is located south of West 12th Street in a
block that is zoned "R-3" and "C-3." The neighborhood
south of West 13th is zoned primarily "R-3,' and the
use is single family. The location of the proposed
project is somewhat unique in that it would abut single
family use only on the west side and one lot on the
north side. To the east, there is a large church zoned
"C-3," and some of the remaining land on the north side
is vacant. Because of the zoning pattern and the
property's position in the block, it appears that the
site is suitable for some type of multifamily
development (Abigail between WeGt 12th and West 13th
has been closed, thus, creating a large block between
Peyton and Lewis Streets. The church occupies what
would be one entire typical block.)
2. The site is vacant and made up of two lots and a
portion of the closed right-of-way for Abigail.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 6 - Continued
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 neighborhood position or history on the
site.
7. The staff's position is that some type of residential
development along West 13th is more desirable than
certain commercial uses allowed in "C-3" and supports
the request to "Mf-24." A multifamily project properly
designed and sited should have little impact on the
surrounding neighborhood because of the property's
location. The potential for commercial use at this
site creating problems for the area is greater than a
residential project. This location is part of the Oak
Forest Neighborhood Plan area. The plan identifies the
area for single family, but staff feels that the
proposed project is compatible with the neighborhood.
In addition, the lots are vacant and, if approved, the
development would remove a possible eyesore - overgrown
lots from the area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "MF-24" request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the
"MF-24" request as filed. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 7 - Z-4510
Owner: Fred W. Hicks, Jr. and
Freida L. Hicks
Applicant: Same
Location: 1506 Commerce Street
Request: Rezone from "C-3" General
Commercial to "R-4" Two Family
Purpose: Single Family Residence
Size: 3750 square feet
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "C-3"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R-4"
East - Duplex, Zoned "C-3"
West - Commercial, Zoned "C-3"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The proposal is to construct a single family residence on
the lot in question, currently zoned "C-3." Because of the
commercial classification, rezoning to a residential
district is required. An "R-4" zoning was chosen because of
being the predominant district in the immediate area that
permits single family units. The rezoning should not create
any problems for the neighborhood and will put a vacant lot
to use. The intersection does not appear to be viable
commercial location because the majority of the "C-3" lots
are either vacant or used for residential purposes. Only
one lot has a nonresidential building on it, and that is in
substandard condition.
Because of the size of the lot, 50' x 75', variances have
been requested for the rear and front yards.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the
request as filed. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 8 - Z-4514
Owner: Various Owners
Applicant: W. Christopher Barrier
Location: Hinson Road, North Side at
Martha Street
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family
to "O-3" General Office
Purpose: Office Use
Size: 12.7 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant, Single Family and
Industrial
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family and Golf Course, Zoned "R-2"
and "R-4"
South - Single Family and School, Zoned "R-2"
East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request before the Planning Commission is to rezone
a 12.7 acre site on Hinson Road to "O-3." The proposed
use is office, but no specifics hav- been provided at
this time. The property is located in an area that is
primarily single family development with the exception
of a school on the south side of Hinson Road and the
Pleasant Valley Golf Course -hick abuts the site on the
north side. Some of the platted residential lots in
the immediate vicinity are still vacant. The
surrounding zoning is either "R-2" or "R-4." Based on
the current development patterns and zoning in the
area, an office rezoning of this tract is questionable
and could have an impact on the single family
development.
2. The site is flat and occupied by single family and
industrial uses. In addition, some of the property is
still vacant.
3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 8 - Continued
4. Engineering reports that the internal traffic plan and
access to Hinson Road must be coordinated with the
Traffic Engineer. No other comments have been received
from the reviewing agencies.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. There is no documented history on the site. At this
time, staff is unaware of any neighborhood position
relative to the rezoning request.
7. The Suburban Development Plan does not endorse an
office development at this location. Because of the
plan, staff is opposed to the request. On the north
side of Hinson Road from Rodney Parham, the rezoning is
"R-2" and has always been identified for residential
use only. Between Green Mountain and Napa Valley, the
south side of Hinson has been shown for nonresidential
use on the plan and a majority of the land is already
zoned to accommodate office development. Staff feels
that the area further to the east is more appropriate
for office uses and that the location under
consideration is misplaced and somewhat removed from
more viable office areas.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recomends denial of the "O-3" rezoning request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Chris Barrier, was present, and he indicated
he was representing Danny Thomas, the proposed developer.
There were 15 objectors in attendance. Mr. Barrier
described the site and some slides were presented. He said
the developer needed the entire tract to make the project
feasible and that there were 13 separate ownerships involved
with the property. Mr. Barrier said that a possible option
for the site was an office park. Mike McQueen, an
architect, presented a conceptual development plan for an
office park project. There was a long discussion about
various issues. Danny Thomas then spoke. He described some
previous development proposals for the site and said the
property was an eyesore. William Griep said he was opposed
to the request and presented a petition with approximately
114 signatures objecting to the rezoning. Ron Fuller
presented another petition from the Marlowe Manor
Subdivision. He indicated that traffic was a major concern
and that the rezoning was out of place with the area.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 8 - Continued
Ben Allen spoke against the request. Jack Holt,
representing the Pleasant Valley Country Club, indicated
that the club was opposed to the rezoning. Ruth Hinson,
owner of the tract, then addressed the Planning Commission.
She said that she had been residing on the property for 45
years and described the site. Ms. Hinson went on to make a
number of other comments. The Planning Commission voted on
the "O-3" request as filed. The vote: 0 ayes, 7 noes,
3 absent and 1 abstention (Dorothy Arnett). The rezoning to
"O-3" was denied.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 9 - Z-4515
Owner: Various Owners
Applicant: Larry Henderson
Location: SW Corner of Bankhead Drive at
I-440
Request: Rezone from Unclassified to
"C-3" General Commercial
Purpose: Motel and Restaurant
Size: 2.7 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant and Single Family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Interstate Right-of-Way, Unclassified
and "R-2"
South - Vacant and Single Family, Unclassified
East - Commercial, Zoned "C-3"
West - Vacant, Unclassified
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The proposal is to rezone the site to "C-3" to permit a
restaurant and motel. The property is currently
outside the City limits, so annexation of the land must
also be accomplished prior to the rezoning being
finalized. The tract is located at an interchange with
I-440 and in close proximity to the airport, so it
appears that the location has commercial potential. To
the east across Bankhead Drive, there is an existing
motel that has proven to be very successful. Land use-
on the west side of Bankhead Drive include single
family, an auto salvage operation, but most of the land
is vacant. Besides the rezoning and annexation issues,
several of the street rights-of-wav and alleys are
proposed to be closed.
2. The site is wooded and vacant for the most part. There
is a single family residence on a portion of the tract.
3. There are no right-of-wax, requirements or Master Street
Plan issues associated with this request.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 9 - Continued
4. Engineering has provided the following comments:
(1) Boundary street improvements required on 33rd
Street as well as Bankhead Drive, including
drainage structures.
(2) Recommend closing Riffel Street. If not, require
boundary street improvements.
(3) Coordinate all access with Traffic Engineer and
AHTD at new intersection at Bankhead Drive.
5. There are no legal issues.
6. Staff has received several informational calls
concerning this request. There is no documented
history on the site.
7. Being located at a major interchange with an interstate
is an appropriate location for a motel and staff
supports the "C-3" request. The rezoning and proposed
use should have little impact on the surrounding area
and will probably encourage further new development in
the immediate vicinity. The general area is better
suited now for a more intense development pattern
because of the interstate and good access.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "C-3" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was represented by Gene Lewis. There were no
objectors present. The Planning Commission voted to
recommend approval of the "C-3" rezoning as filed. The
vote: 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 noes and 1 abstention
(Bill Rector).
August 27, 1985
Item No. 10 - Z-4516
Owner: Various Owners
Applicant: Michael Watson
Location: 6706 S. University Avenue
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family,
"PRD" and "C-3" General Commercial
to "C-4" Open Display
Purpose: Auto Sales
Size: 6.7 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant and Auto Sales
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
and "C-4"
South - Vacant and Commercial, Zoned "R-2" and
and "C-3"
East - Right -of -way and Commercial, Zoned "C-3"
and "I-2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. ThP request is to rezone the land to "C-4" for auto
sales. That portion of the property that has frontage
on S. Unversity is currently used for a car sales lot
so the rezoning if approved would remov- 'he
nonconforming aspect of that use. The remainder of the
site is vacant. The rezoning proposal as submitted
would have leave a 200-foot "R-2" strip east of
Mabelvale Pike. (The tentative agenda sketch did not
reflect the proposed "R-2" tract). That type of zoning
pattern is consistent with the east side of Mabelvale
Pike where none of the commercial zoning extends all
the way from S. Unversity to Mabelvale Pike. The only
non - single family residential classification along
Mabelvale Pike is the "PRD" which has never been
developed and will hav^ to rescinded if this rezoning
is approved. Currently, there are "C-3" and "C-4"
tracts that are closer to Mabelvale Pike than what is
proposed with this request. So, no new precedent will
be established by the rezoning as filed.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 10 - Continued
2. A portion of the property is occupied by an auto sales
lot and related buildings. The remainder of the site
is vacant and wooded.
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. The existing "PRD" was approved in 1984, and there was
opposition from the neighborhood to that
reclassification. Over the years, the residents in the
area have expressed dissatifaction with the rezoning
proposals in the general area. With the request, it is
staff's understanding that several of the nearby
homeowners are opposed to the rezoning.
7. The strip between S. Unversity and Mabelvale Pike has
been affected by previous commercial reclassifications,
and this rezoning, if granted, should have a minimal
impact on the area. Because of the 200 -foot "R-2"
strip, the staff supports the "C-4" request as filed.
For the most part, the 200-foot area is greater than
the remaining "R-2" land along Mabelvale Pike north of
this site and should provide an adequate buffer. The
Suburban Development Plan identifies the area for strip
commercial use and "C-4" is a compatible zoning
district for that type of development pattern.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C-4" request with the
200-foot "R-2" strip east of Mabelvale Pike.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Don Chambers, was present. There were six
persons in attendance who expressed an interest in the item.
Mr. Chambers discussed the property and development of the
site. He said that there would be adequate buffers, proper
drainage would be installed and there would be no outside
maintenance of vehicles. Fonda Lyle, a resident on
Mabelvale Pike, then spoke for three of the adjoining
property owners in the area. She expressed some concern
about the required notification. Staff indicated that it
August 27, 1985
Item No. 10 - Continued
was all in order. Ms. Lyle then suggested a possible
deferral because of one of the property owners being out of
town. She then presented a map and some written
information. Ms. Lyle said that the residents were not
opposed to the rezoning but did want certain conditions met
such as drainage, fencing, landscaping and proper lighting.
Mike Batie of the City Engineering staff said that normal
drainage requirements would be placed on the
project /property. Ms. Lyle then discussed in detail some of
the conditions. She reauested that certain trees be left
and that there be no loud speakers or large lights. She
also informed the Planning Commission that the neighborhood
would keep a close eye on what was taking place on the
property. D.J. Jones of Twin City Motors said because of
the short period of time to review the conditions, that he
had problems agreeing with certain aspects. Joan Adcock
indicated she was concerned about the future of the
property. After some additional comments, the Planning
Commission voted to recommend approval of the "C-4" request
as filed. The vote: 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. The
Planning Commission also passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes
and 3 absent a resolution recommending to the Board of
Directors that the existing PRD be rescinded.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 11 - Z-4517
Owner: Eagle Properties
Applicant: Lawrence Jacimore
Location: 4721 Baseline Road
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family
to "C-3" General Commercial
Purpose: Make Existing Uses Conform
Size: 1.4 acres ±
Existing Use: Retail and Mini - Storage
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The site in question is located along a section of Baseline
Road that was part of the referendum area which was upheld
by the Supreme Court in April of this year. The property is
completely developed with a small-scale shopping center on
the front portion and mini-warehouses in the rear.
Mini-warehouses will require a conditional use permit to
establish them as conforming uses. The proposed Geyer
Springs East District Plan recognizes the existing
commercial uses, and staff supports the request because of
the plan.
Dedication of additional right-of-way will be required for
Baseline Road. Additional right-of-way for South Heights
Road may also be required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of "C-3" rezoning as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the
rezoning as filed. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 12 - Z -4518
Owner: Eagle Properties
Applicant: Lawrence Jacimore
Location: 8300 Block of Shelley Drive and
5310 Baseline Road
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family
to "C-4" Open Display
Purpose: Make Existing Uses Conform
Size: 1.7 acres ±
Existing Use: Retail and Mini - Storage
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family and Multifamily, Zoned "R-2"
South - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
East - Multifamily and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
West - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The property under consideration is located on Baseline
Road, east of Geyer Springs, and came into the City in April
1985, by the State Supreme Court upholding the annexation of
certain lands by referendum. The parcels are fully
developed with nonconforming uses such as mini-storage units
and an auto service center. It is possible that several of
the uses in the building fronting Baseline will require a
conditional use permit to discontinue their nonconforming
status because of certain retail uses in "C-4" being listed
as conditional uses. The proposed Geyer Springs East
District Plan identifies the location for a continued
commercial development. The "C-4" reclassification is
appropriate for Baseline Road which was classified as a
major arterial.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "C-4" rezoning request as
filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the "C-4"
request as filed. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 13 - Z-4520
Owner: Salvation Army
Applicant: Raymond Branton
Location: 1111 West Markham Street
Request: Rezone from "C -4" Open Display
to "C -3" General Commercial
Purpose: To Expand Use and Building
Size: .67 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant and Quasipublic
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Office and Commercial, Zoned "C-4"
South - Parking, Zoned "C-4"
East - Parking and Commercial, Zoned "C-4"
West - Commercial and Industrial, Capitol Zoning
District
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is by the Salvation Army to rezone the property
to "C-3" to allow for the expansion of their uses and
building. A rezoning is necessary because the "C-4"
District does not permit the "establishment of a religious,
charitable or philantrophic organization," and with the
proposal, expanding a nonconforming use becomes the issue.
The new addition will accommodate both the adminstrative
functions and transient lodging for families. Staff feels
that the rezoning is appropriate for the location and
supports the request. Once the rezoning is approved, the
property will be compliance with the ordinance. The
existing "C-4" zoning in this part of downtown was
accomplished through the conversion from the old zoning
ordinance to the current one.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the "C-3"
rezoning as filed. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 14 - Z-4521
Owner: Leo B. King
Applicant: Burton Speights
Location: 1301 S. Shackleford Road
(south of Kanis Road)
Request: Rezone from "O-3" General Office
to "O-2" Office and Institutional
Purpose: Motel (96 rooms)
Size: 3.2 acres ±
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "O-3"
South - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "O-3"
East - Vacant, Zoned "O-3"
West - Vacant, Zoned "C-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request is to rezone the tract to "O-2" for a motel
which will require a conditional permit prior to the site
being developed. The property is located on the east side
of Shackleford just south of Kanis Road. The area south of
Kanis has a mix of office and commercial zoning with the
east side of Shackleford being zoned "O-2" or "O-3."
Staff's position is that the rezoning is compatible with the
area and the proposed use should not cause any adverse
impacts. The rezoning to "O-2" conforms to the "I-430
District Plan and staff supports the request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the "O-2" rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the
rezoning request as filed. The vote: 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
August 27, 1985
Item No. 15 - Planning Commission Review of the 1985
Calendar of Meeting Dates
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning staff presented the revised calendar for
meeting dates October through December 1985, for purposes
of restructuring the scheduled public hearings. The staff
offering included two public hearings during the month of
November in place of the current scheduled single meeting
and a restructuring of the December meeting by moving the
hearing date from December 10th to December 17th. After a
brief discussion of the matter the Planning Commission voted
on a motion to approve the calendar as presented by the
staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3
absent.
P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
DATE t (ftf£U,2f 0,,... / C / "GC:J
-. ZONING ----· SUBDIVISION
MEMBER A B I z
J.StJffilllPrl-in / / ✓✓
J.Schlereth ,/ / ,/ ✓
R.Massie v I✓ / ✓
B.Sipes II n
J.Nicholson ✓( ✓ I
w.Rector v I ✓ I
w.Ketcher ✓/ I v
D.Arnett v ,/ ,/ I
D.J. Jones ✓✓ / I
I.Bo_les v ,I ✓ ,/
J� Clayton II I I
3 , , ,
, ,
I
I t •
1-, , ,
,
� , ,
✓
j/
V O T E R E C O R D
ITEM NUMBERS
5 l, 1 8 9 /o , / / , / ✓ ' ✓ I/ '✓✓
I I✓ ,/ •✓✓
, ✓ I ,✓ ,/' ✓ ✓ ' i / ' ✓ ✓ ,.. ,/ ✓ •v ii IJ'i ✓ v' ✓ ✓ ' ✓ ✓ II ✓ ✓ If II--4,
✓AYE • NAYE A ABSENT �ABSTAIN
-
// /Z✓ ✓
✓I✓✓ ✓
✓ � ✓v"✓✓ ✓V✓v✓ ✓
]� I l) d'v
/3 /¥ I
✓✓ /v ✓ v,
✓✓ ✓
IA 4 n ✓✓ ✓✓ v ✓✓ ✓✓
✓✓ v
✓✓ ✓✓ ✓ ri
/J 4 ,,
August 27, 1985
There being no further business before the Planning
Commission, the Chairperson adjourned the meeting at
3:45 p.m.
Chairperson
Secretary
Date