HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_01 09 2003LITTLE ROCK PLANNING CQMMISSIQN
PLANNING —REZONING —CQNDITIQNAL USE HEARING
MINUTE RECQRD
JANUARY 9,2003
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being ten (10)in number.
II.Members Present:Judith Faust
Gary Langlals
Norm Floyd
Qbray Nunnley,Jr.
Bob Lowry
Mizan Rahman
Bill Rector
Rohn Muse
Jerry Meyer
Fred Allen,Jr.
Members Absent:Robert Stebbins
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
III.Approval of the Minutes of the November 14,2002 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission.The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE RGCK PLANNING CGMMISSIQN
PLANNING —REZGNING —CGNDITIGNAL USE HEARING
JANUARY 9,2003
4:00 P.M.
I.DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.LU02-18-06 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District from Suburban Gffice to Gffice at West 36'"Street and
Bowman Road.
B.Z-6049-A Rezoning from R-2 to G-3
West side of Bowman Road at West 36""Street
C.Z-5459-A Forest Park Elementary School —Conditional Use Permit
1600 N.Tyler Street
D.Z-4463-D National Car Wash —Conditional Use Permit
8100 West Markham Street
II.NEW ITEMS:
1.Z-3660-D Rezoning from R-2 and C-3 to C-4
Northwest corner of Interstate 30 and Gtter Creek Road
2.LU03-1 "I-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment from Multifamily to Mixed Gffice
Commercial on the Southwest corner of 36'"Street and Interstate
430.
2.1.Z-7336 Rezoning from MF-12 to C-2
Southwest corner of West 36'treet and Interstate 430
3.LU03-11-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment from Single Family to Gffice in the
1800 Block of Aldersgate Road.
3.1.Z-7337 Rezoning from R-2 to G-3
Northeast corner of Aldersgate Road and West 18'"Street
4.Z-3789-I Agape Church Tower Use Permit
701 Napa Valley Drive
5.Z-5786-C SouthwestChristianAcademy —Revised Conditional Use Permit
11301 Geyer Springs Road
Agenda,Page Two
I I.NEW ITEMS:(Cont.)
6.Z-6079-D Little Rock Christian Academy —Revised Conditional Use Permit
19,010 Cantrell Road
7.Z-7324 Harris Duplex —Conditional Use Permit
3223 Cobb Street
8.Z-7331 Klitz Accessory Dwelling —Conditional Use Permit
10,901 West 36'treet
9.Z-7332 Ryan Accessory Dwelling —Conditional Use Permit
201 Crystal Court
1 0.Z-7333 Gamble Day Care Center -Conditional Use Permit
706 Nix Road
11.Z-7334 T-Mobile Tower Use Permit
3100 I-30
12.Z-7335 Westside YMCA Family Center —Conditional Use Permit
South side of Denny Road,"/2 mile West of Kanis Road
13.6-25-186 South Elm Street Name Change to Jack Stephens Drive
14.LU03-01-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment from Transition,Commercial and
Multifamily to Gffice,Suburban Gffice,Low Density Residential,
Single Family,Park/Open Space and Public Institutional for
areas along the Highway 10 corridor from I-430 to Rummell
Road.
15.Midtown —Discussion of Boundaries and Design Concepts
16.Master Street Plan Amendment in the area bounded by l-30,Fourche Creek and
Arkansas River,revising street classifications and design standards.
17.LU03-06-01 A Land Use Plan in the l-30,East Little Rock and Port Districts
bounded by l-30,Fourche Creek and Arkansas River changing the
area to Low Density Residential,Public Institutional,Park Gpen
Space,Commercial,Mixed Use Urban,Service Trades District,
Light Industrial and Industrial.
18.Resoiution of support for the Walnut Valley —Birchwood Neighborhoods Plan
19.Proposed Planned Zoning District Grdinance Revisions
20.Election of 2003 Gfficers
OARREIT
6
j j Public Hearing
ARKANSAS Items
'EEET,4
C
9D
13
PNOE VNTEY 7777 ISNISI
10 CANIS STO 'FqNIS121HEOM101H
'2 7 NSOHTa
IOOSETELT L~~i&
"'IOOSEVT17
lANSON I-44I8
11IAWEIN IRAEER PNK
A B a INNISI
SSM
RANKS +VATTEY NIY IRIS
BASEUK
1 )5 BNN
V
%ST
RNNER
O&VMSON I
IETANOER
CURST
077 TROTS I
I 5
PRA17
Planning —Rezoning —Conditional Use Hearing January 9,2003
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:LU02-18-06
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Ellis Mountain Planning District
Location:Bowman Road at W,36th Street
~Re uest:Suburban Office and Low Density Residential to Office
Source:Pat McGetrick,McGetrick S McGetrick
PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Suburban
Office to Office.The office category represents services provided directly to
consumers (e.g.,legal,financial,medical)as well as general offices,which
support more basic economic activities.The applicant wishes to develop the
property for office uses.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request,the Planning Staff expanded
the area of review to include the area south of the applicant's property shown as
Suburban Office and Low Density Residential to the boundary of the area shown
as Park /Open Space shown along the floodway/floodplain of Brodie Creek.All
of the land shown as Suburban Office and Low Density Residential between the
applicant's property and the floodway/floodplain shown as Park /Open Space
would be eliminated.The additional area would provide a viable tract of land for
Office uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately 12.84+
acres in size.A house built on a large lot occupies the property under review.
All of the surrounding property is zoned R-2 Single Family and is developed with
houses built on large lots.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On July 3,2001 multiple changes were made from Low Density Residential,
Mixed Office Commercial,and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family in an
area bounded by Bowman Road,Panther Creek,Cooper Orbit Road and Brodie
Creek within a 1-mile radius of the applicant's property to the north and west.
On January 6,2001 a change was made from Mixed Use and Suburban Office
to Commercial and Office at the southeast corner of the I-430 and Col.Glenn
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-06
interchange about I mile southeast of the property under review to fit the pattern
of land use located in the vicinity of that application area.
On September 19,2000 a change was made from Low Density Residential and
Mixed Office Commercial at the northeast corner of Bowman Road and W.36'"
Street,across the street to the east of the amendment area to allow Mixed Uses
at that location.
On April 6,1999 a change was made from Office and Commercial to Mixed
Office Commercial on the northwest corner of Col.Glenn and Bowman Road
about '/~of a mile south of the application area to the pattern of land use located
at that area.
The applicant's property is shown as Suburban Office on the Future Land Use
Plan.The property to the north is shown as Suburban Office while the property
to the northeast is shown as Mixed Use.The property to the east is shown as
Mixed Office Commercial while the property to the south is shown as Suburban
Office.The property to the west is shown as Low Density Residential.A strip of
Park/Open Space is shown along the floodway of Brodie Creek.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
W.36'"Street and Bowman Road are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master
Street Plan and are built as rural two lane roads.The Master Street Plan also
shows a re-alignment of Bowman Road that would eliminate the curve adjacent
to the property in question.W.36'treet is also shown as a Proposed Minor
Arterial that will link Bowman Road to the Proposed West Loop.The Master
Street plan lists special conditions for W.36'treet,with a 3-lane section of
right-of-way of 70 feet from State Highway 5 to Bowman Road,and a 4-lane
right-of-way of 80 feet with 5 lanes at major intersections with a 90-foot right-of-
way.
A Class III BikewaII is shown on both W.36 Street and Bowman Road.The
bikeway on W.36'treet starts at Bowman Road and continues east to Rock
Creek while the bikeway on Bowman Road links Executive Center Drive to Col.
Glenn Road.Development of the applicant's property will require half street
improvements on Bowman Road and be responsible for a portion of the W.
36'treetextension.The only bikeway affected by development of the applicant's
property will be the one on Bowman Road.Since a Class III Bikeway shares the
pavement of the main roadway,half street improvements will need to make
accommodations for the bikewag.Development of the applicant's property will
not affect the bikeway on W.36 Street since it starts at Bowman Road and
continues east.
The re-alignment of Bowman Road would eliminate the curve around the hill
north of the house on the applicant's property.The new alignment of Bowman
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-06
Road would eliminate most of the front yard on the application area property.
The new intersection between Bowman Road and W.36 Street would sit
approximately at the current location of the driveway on the property.The
proposed extension of W.36'"Street would also divide the application property
in two and create a four-way intersection in place of the current T-shape
intersection.The re-alignment of Bowman Road will require a 90 foot right-of-
way while the extension of W.36'treet will require a 90 foot right-of-way at the
intersection and an 80 foot right-of-way for the remainder of the proposed
extension.The proposed changes at the Bowman Road and W.36 Street
intersection would greatly reduce the land area available for development on the
applicant's property.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the
applicant's property is located within eight blocks of the Potential Greenbelt at
Brodie Creek.This Potential Greenbelt serves as an area that may be used for
either recreational uses,and or open space opportunities.The Potential
Greenbelt also covers the flood plain of Brodie Creek,which is also shown as
Park /Open Space.Development of the applicant's property would need to
respect the integrity of the watershed and the viability of the Potential Greenbelt.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There is not any historic districts near-by that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
This application area is located in a.part of the city characterized by low-density
semi-rural development patterns.Although there is land available for office
developments near the application area,most of the office developments would
require a Planned Zoning Development.The property currently shown as
Suburban Office provides land for low intensity development of office or office
parks that would have a minimum impact on neighboring residential uses.
However,any developments in an area shown as Office on the applicant's
property would be buffered from the areas shown as Single Family by the strip of
Park/Open Space and the area shown as Low-Density Residential,as well as
the area remaining Suburban Office.Most of the area shown as Mixed Use is
zoned Planned Office Development for a future church,reducing the amount of
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-06
land available for future office development in that area.The area shown as
Mixed Office Commercial provides for a mixture of office and commercial uses to
occur and would ideally develop with a mixture of office and commercial uses.
However,a development could occur in MOC with strictly office uses.A
development in MOC would most likely be a mixture of office and commercial
uses in a PZD.Currently the land shown as Mixed Office Commercial is zoned
R-2 Single Family and MF-12 Multi-family and would require a re-zoning to allow
the development of any non-residential uses.This amendment would provide
land that could be developed for strictly Office uses without a mixture of uses
and without the requirement for a PZD.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Gibraltar/Pt.
West/Timber Ridge,Parkway Place Property Owners Association,Spring Valley
Manor Property Owners Association,Sandpiper Neighborhood Association,and
John Barrow Neighborhood Association.Staff has not received comments from
area residents at this time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is pre-mature.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(November 14,2002)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 9,2003
Planning Commission meeting.A motion was made to approve the consent
agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal.A motion was made
to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes
and 1 absent.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:Z-6049-A
Owner:Unity Church
Applicant:McGetrick and McGetrick Engineering
Location:West side of Bowman Road at West 36'"Street
Size:12.84 Acres
Request:Rezone from R-2 to 0-3
Purpose:Future Office Use
Existing Use:Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Single Family Residences;zoned R-2
South —Single Family Residences and horse ranch;zoned R-2
East —Single Family Residences and nonconforming commercial
use (across Bowman Road to the southeast);zoned R-2,
undeveloped (across Bowman Road to the northeast);zoned R-2
West —Undeveloped;zoned R-2
A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.This property is traversed by the proposed re-alignment of Bowman
Road and the proposed extension of 36 Street.The proposed right-
of-way dedication should be shown on the plans.Contact Public
Works 918-5345.
2.A regulated Floodway passes through this property.Dedicate the
limits of the regulated floodway and a 25-foot wide access easement
adjacent to the floodway.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6049-A
With Buildin Permit:
3.Provide design of streets conforming to the Master Street Plan.
Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including
5-foot sidewalks with planned development.
4.A grading permit and development permit for special flood hazard area
is required prior to construction.
B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The property is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
C.PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet
who could be identified,and the Sandpiper and John Barrow
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning request.
D.LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.The Land
Use Plan shows Suburban Office and Low Density Residential for this
property.The applicant has applied for a zoning change to 0-3 General
Office for office uses.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Office is a separate item on
this agenda.(Item 2.)
Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of
Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
E.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The 12.84 acre property located along the west side of Bowman Road at
West 36'"Street is currently zoned R-2,single family residential.There
are two (2)single family residences located at the northeast corner of the
property,with the remainder of the property being undeveloped and
partially wooded.The western portion of the site is located in the
floodplain.
On October 31,1995,the Planning Commission approved a conditional
use permit for a church development on this site.The church
development never took place and therefore,the conditional use permit
has expired.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6049-A
The request currently before the Commission is to rezone the 12.84 acres
from "R-2"Single Family District to "0-3"General Office District.The
applicant proposes to rezone the property for a future office development,
after sale of the property.The property is currently designated as
Suburban Office and Low Density Residential on the City's Future Land
Use Plan.A land use plan amendment from SO and LDR to Office is a
separate item on this agenda (Item 2).
Staff does not support the proposed rezoning.The Suburban Office land
use plan designation for the east portion of the property would allow for a
low intense office or office park development.A PZD (Planned Zoning
Development)zoning would be required for any development within the
Suburban Office land use plan area.The PZD is required to assure
compatibility with lower density residential areas which are abutting or in
close proximity to the area of Suburban Office.
Given the fact that all of the abutting property is zoned R-2,with several
existing single family residences on larger lots,staff feels that the
proposed rezoning to 0-3 will not be compatible with these properties.
Although staff is not necessarily opposed to an office development on this
property,staff feels that it should be done under a PZD review,which
would address all aspects of the property's development,use and
compatibility with the abutting properties and general area.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested 0-3 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 14,2002)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter
requesting that the application be deferred to the January 9,2003 agenda.Staff
supported the deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the January 9,2003 agenda.A motion to that
effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
The application was deferred.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the application.There was one (1)
person present with concerns.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6049-A
Staff noted that the applicant had revised the application as follows:
1.Rezoning from R-2 to 0-2.
2.Maximum building height of three (3)stories.
Staff recommended approval of the revised application.
Pat McGetrick verified the revised application as noted by staff.
Mona Blacklaw addressed the commission,noting that she had no problem with
the revised application.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as amended by the applicant and recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of
10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The amended application was approved.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-5459-A
NAME:Forest Park Elementary School —Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION:1600 N.Tyler Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Little Rock School District/Peters and Associates
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
addition of parking on this existing,R-2 zoned,
elementary school campus.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The campus is located within the block bounded by "0"Street,"P"Street,
Tyler Street and Polk Street;one block south of Cantrell Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The campus is located within a residential neighborhood and is
surrounded by single-family occupied,R-2 zoned properties.No
expansion of school grounds or the building are proposed.The proposed
parking expansion will not affect the school's compatibility with the
neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Hillcrest and Propsect
Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The school contains 23 classrooms and has 38 total employees;requiring
61 on-site parking spaces.There is currently no on-site parking.Utilizing
a portion of the right-of-way,the school district proposes to construct 29,
60'ngle parking spaces along "0"Street and Polk Street.Each of these
streets are one-way,local streets with very little traffic other than for that
generated by the school.Bus loading/unloading currently occurs on "0"
Street.It will be relocated to Tyler Street.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No screening and buffer issues.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5459-A
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Dedicate right-of-way to 5'ehind the proposed parking back-of-curb
(make it public parking),or obtain a franchise agreement for that
portion of the parking lot located within the public right-of-way (private
parking).
2.Vehicles backing out of the parking should not back into an
intersection.Remove or relocate the eastern most parking stalls on"0"Street and the southernmost.stall on Polk.
3.There are currently no sidewalks on "0"Street and Polk Street.
Provide 5'idewalks with proposed improvements.
4.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk on all adjacent
streets that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
5.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
6.Streetimprovementplansshallincludesignageand striping.Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
7.Obtain permits (barricade/street cut)for improvements within proposed
or existing right-of-way from Public Works Civil Engineering and Traffic
Engineering prior to construction.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated,
contact Central Arkansas Water.That work would be done at the
expense of the developer.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
C~PI i::N C t i ~,
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(OCTOBER 24,2002)
Doug Eaton and Earnest Peters,were present representing the application.
Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5459-A
the number of classrooms,total number of employees and signage.Staff noted
that the proposed parking on "0"Street was located in the area currently used
for bus drop-off/pick-up.Mr.Eaton responded that the buses would be moved to
the Tyler Street perimeter.
Most of the discussion centered on Public Works'omments.Mike Hood,of
Public Works,commented that additional right-of-way should be dedicated to
place the entirety of the proposed new parking in the right-of-way,making it
public parking or a franchise agreement would need to be obtained for the
portion of the parking located in the right-of-way if the parking was to remain
private.Mr.Eaton responded that it was the school district's desire to keep the
parking private so that there would be control over who utilized it.In response to
a question from Commissioner Berry,Mr.Hood stated that staff was supportive
of the proposal to have parking backing out into "0"and Polk Streets because
they were local streets with very little traffic,other than that generated by the
school.In response to Public Works'omment that sidewalks were needed on
the "0"and Polk Street perimeters of the school site,Mr.Peters and Mr.Eaton
both stated that the terrain in that area made sidewalk construction very difficult.
Mr.Peters described a retaining wall that was going to be built in that area,
rendering the area unbuildable for sidewalks.There was a brief discussion of
whether right-of-way was needed for the abutting streets since,although they are
residential streets,the Master Street Plan classifies than as commercial streets
since they abut a nonresidential use.Mr.Hood stated he would discuss the
issue with Public Works Staff and the applicant.The applicant was advised to
respond to staff issues no later than noon,Wednesday October 30,2002.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to
the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Forest Park Elementary School occupies the block of R-2 zoned property
bounded by "0","P",Tyler and Polk Streets.The site contains a single building
with 23 classrooms.There are no parking spaces on-site.Parallel parking
occurs along the various streets.Bus loading/unloading takes place on "0"
Street.The school district proposes to utilize a portion of the right-of-way to
construct 60 angle parking spaces along "0"and Polk Streets.The parking will
back into the streets.The bus loading/unloading will be relocated to Tyler Street.
No other changes are proposed to the site other than for new,4 foot chain-link
fencing to be installed in front of the parking spaces.Some of the fencing may
be located on top of a retaining wall.
On November 1,2002,the applicant submitted written responses to staff issues
raised at Subdivision Committee.No new site plan was submitted.Issues
remaining to be resolved are right-of-way dedication,franchising the parking and
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5459-A
providing sidewalks on "0"and Polk Street.It appears the district concurs with
dedicating the required right-of-way,if the parking spaces can be franchised for
use by the school.Staff is supportive of this action.The applicant has indicated
a desire to have the sidewalk requirement waived.Staff does not support that
request.
Staff does support the overall conditional use permit to allow the angled parking.
The streets around the school are all one-way,local streets that generate little
traffic beyond that created by the school itself.Allowing the angled parking
should not have a detrimental effect on the traffic pattern in the area.Relocating
the bus drop-off/pick-up to Tyler Street will allow the buses to turn either east or
west on "0"Street;more evenly dispersing the bus traffic away from the school.
No new signage,site lighting or building expansion is proposed.No changes are
proposed to the school programs or classes on the site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
Compliance with staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5 and 6
of this report.
Staff recommends that the Commission support a franchise to allow use of the"0"and Polk Street rights-of-way for the proposed parking.
Staff does not support a waiver of the requirement to construct sidewalks along
the "0"and Polk Street perimeters.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(NOVEMBER 14,2002)
The applicant was present.There was one objector present.One letter and a
petition had been received.The letter and petition offered an alternative plan for
the proposed parking along Polk Street.Staff informed the Commission that the
applicant was requesting deferral of the item in order to meet with the concerned
neighbors.The request for deferral was received two days prior to the meeting.
Antonio Mesa,of 1612 N.Polk Street,asked if the Commission had received his
letter and alternate plan.Chairman Lowry responded that the letter and plan had
been received and the item would be deferred to allow the applicant an
opportunity to meet with the neighbors.There was no further discussion.A
motion was made to waive the Bylaws and accept the late request for deferral.
The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes,1 absent and 1 recusing
(Lowry).
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the January 9,
2003 meeting.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes,1 absent and 1 recusing (Lowry).
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5459-A
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter
requesting that the application be deferred to the February 20,2003 agenda.
Staff supported the deferral request.
With a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent,the Commission voted to waive
their bylaws and accept the deferral request being less than five (5)working days
prior to the public hearing.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the February 20,2003 agenda.A motion to that
effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
The application was deferred.
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-4463-D
NAME:National Car Wash —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:8100 West Markham Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Emmanuel Baptist Church and Make-A-Wish
Foundation/Development Consultants,Inc.
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
development of a car wash facility on this C-3 zoned
property.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the north side of West Markham Street;two blocks
east of Rodney Parham Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
Although development of the site as a small car wash facility would be
compatible with development in the immediate vicinity,specifics of the project
must be sensitive to the fact that residential uses abut the site on the north and
east.The one aspect of a self-serve car wash facility that creates the greatest
potential for noise is the vacuum island.In addition to the noise of the
vacuums,vehicles are often parked at the islands with doors open and,
occasionally,loud music playing.Staff is concerned that placement of the
vacuum islands behind the car wash bays brings the noisiest aspect of the use
too close to the residential uses.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300
feet who could be identified and the Apache Crime Watch Neighborhood
Association were notified of the proposal.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A car wash requires 5 on-site parking spaces plus one for each 250 square feet
of gross building area.This development requires a total of 16 on site parking
spaces.Counting the wash bays and vacuum islands,there is sufficient space
on the site to accommodate the needed parking.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-4463-D
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with Ordinance requirements.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Right-of-way dedication and boundary street improvements are shown on
the proposed site plan.
2.Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts.Obtain barricade
permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way.Contact Traffic
Engineering at 501-340-4854 (Derrick Bergfield)for more information.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work.
4.A Grading Permit will be required per Sec.29-186(c)and (d),if tree clearing
is involved.
5.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
6.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the
current ADA standards.
7.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:15"sewer main located on property.No permanent foundation or
building permitted within five foot of existing sewer main.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments received.
Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding meter size and location.
Due to the nature of the processes used in this facility,installation of an
approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly will be
required on the domestic water service.This device shall be installed prior
to any outlet.
Fire Department:No Comments received.
C ttPI i I:N C
CATA:No Comments received.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-4463-D
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JUNE 13,2002)
Tom Cole was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the
proposed car wash development,noting that some additional information was needed
from the applicant.
In response to an issue raised by staff,Mr.Cole stated that the developer wished to
have all six (6)vacuum islands as shown on the site plan.Mr.Cole noted that the site
was very tight and hard to develop based on a drainage easement that the property
owner dedicated to the City,and that the developer needed the extra revenue that
would be generated by the six (6)vacuum stations.Mr.Cole stated that he had no
other issues with the Planning Staff requirements.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Mr.Cole indicated no issues
with these requirements.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission
for final action.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The C-3 zoned property at 8100 West Markham Street is occupied by a one-story,
block building and the remnants of a paved parking lot.A convenience store with gas
pumps previously occupied the site.The applicant proposes to redevelop the site as a
car wash.The proposal includes a single building containing 4 self-service wash bays
and 1 automatic wash bay.Two vacuum islands are to be located to the south (front),
north (rear)and east (side)of the car wash building.No canopies are proposed for
the vacuum islands.The days and hours of operation are proposed to be 7 days a
week,24 hours a day.
Although staff is supportive of the concept of allowing a car wash to be developed on
the site,there are outstanding issues that have yet to be resolved.Staff is not
supportive of allowing the vacuum islands to be located behind the car wash,near the
multifamily residences north of the site.A signage plan has not been submitted,
particularly for any signs proposed on the car wash building and at the vacuum
islands.Additional details on the building such as height and roof design have not
been submitted.
This issue has been deferred numerous times,since July 11,2002.Staff could
support the proposal if the issues noted above were addressed satisfactorily.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application,as filed.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-4463-D
STAFF REPORT:
On June 19,2002,the applicant submitted a request that this item be deferred to the
August 22,2002 commission meeting.Staff supports the request.There are minor
issues to be addressed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JULY 11,2002)
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.Staff informed the
Commission that the applicant had requested deferral of the item.There was no
further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the August 22,2002
agenda.The vote was 9 ayes,0 noes,1 absent and 1 open position.
STAFF REPORT:
On July 16,2002,the applicant submitted a request that this item be deferred to the
October 3,2002 Commission meeting.Staff supports the request.There are minor
issues remaining to be resolved.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 22,2002)
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.Staff informed the
Commission that,on July 16,2002,the applicant submitted a request that the item be
deferred to the October 3,2002 Commission meeting.There was no further
dlscusslon.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the
October 3,2002 meeting.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes,0 absent and 1 open
position.
STAFF REPORT:
On September 5,2002,the applicant submitted a request that the item be deferred to
January 9,2003.Staff supports the request.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-4463-D
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(OCTOBER 3,2002)
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.Staff informed the
Commission that,on September 5,2002,the applicant had submitted a request that
the item be deferred to the January 9,2003 agenda.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes
and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff informed the
Commission that the applicant had requested that the item be withdrawn.
There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for withdrawal without
prejudice.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:Z-3660-D
Owner:Otter Creek Land Company
Applicant:McGetrick and McGetrick Engineering
Location:Northwest corner of Interstate 30 and Otter Creek Road
Request:Rezone from C-3 and OS to C-4
Size:Approximately 58.8 acres
Purpose:Future commercial development
Existing Use:Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Undeveloped and wooded;zoned C-4 and OS
South —Trucking company and undeveloped property;zoned C-4 (across
Otter Creek Road).
East —Mixture of commercial and industrial uses;zoned C-2 and l-2
(across l-30)
West —Undeveloped and wooded;zoned OS and R-2
A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Show the limits of the floodplain and floodway on the survey.
Easements or public dedication of the floodway plus a 25'uffer along
each side of the floodway will be required.
2.Show all boundary streets on the survey in which future development
will take access.
3.Traffic impact studies may be required with future development.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3660-D
B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The property is not located on a CATA Bus Route.CATA Routes 17 and
17A are located across Interstate 30 to the east.
C.PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet
who could be identified,and the Otter Creek,Crystal Valley and SWLR
UP Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning request.
D.LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District.The Land Use
Plan shows Commercial for this property.The applicant has applied for
C-4 Open Display Commercial zoning for future commercial development.
The request is consistent with the Land Use of Commercial.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Otter
Creek/Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action Plan.The Office and
Commercial development goal listed an objective maintaining as much of
the existing topography,trees,and green space as possible.Three
relevant action statements encourage the use of Planned Zoning Districts
for new business developments,encourages intense uses to be located at
the peripheral of the study area,and discouraging intense uses at the
heart of the study area.The plan defines the heart of the study area as
the section of Stagecoach Road between Otter Creek Baseline Roads.
E.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request before the Commission is to rezone approximately 58.8 acres
of property located at the northwest corner of Interstate 30 and Otter
Creek Road from "C-3"General Commercial District and "OS"Open
Space District to "C-4"Open Display District.The rezoning is requested
for a future multi-lot commercial development.The property is currently
undeveloped and mostly wooded.Of the 58.8 acres,56.2 is currently
zoned C-3,with a small 2.6 acre sliver being zoned OS.
Staff supports the requested rezoning.As noted previously,the proposed
rezoning to C-4 is consistent with the City's current Land Use Plan
designation of Commercial.There is currently a large area of C-4 zoning
(over 60 acres)immediately north of the existing C-3 zoning.Both the C-3
and C-4 zoned acres (as well as the OS zoned area to the north and
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3660-D
west)have the same ownership.All of this commercial property is
planned to be developed as a multi-lot commercial project,with a system
of internal streets.The preliminary plat for the development will be
presented to the Commission at a later date.Additionally,there is C-4
zoning across Otter Creek Road to the south.Staff feels that the
proposed C-4 zoning is reasonable,and believes that the rezoning will
have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-4 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:LU03-11-02
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Ellis Mountain Planning District
Location:Southwest corner of l-430 and W.36th St.
Re&eueat:Multi-family to Mixed Office Commercial
Source:Pat McGetrick,McGetrick 8 McGetrick
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District is for a
change from Multi-family to Mixed Office Commercial.The Mixed Office
Commercial category provides for a mixture of office and commercial uses to
occur.Acceptable uses are office or mixed office and commercial.A Planned
Zoning District is required if the use is mixed office and commercial.The
applicant wishes to develop the property for future commercial uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is vacant land zoned MF-12 Multi-family and is approximately 19.2+
acres in size.The property north of Brodie Creek consists of houses built on
large lots zoned R-2 Single Family.The property North of W.36'treet is
zoned R-2 Single Family for the house located along the street while the vacant
land to the north is zoned Planned Office Development for a church and related
religious out reach activities.The vacant property at the southeast corner of I-
430 and W.36 Street is zoned OS Open to recognize the floodway of Brodie
Creek at that location.The rest of the land east of l-430 across from the study
area is vacant land zoned 0-2 Office and Institutional.The vacant land to the
south is zoned C-2 Shopping Center.The land to the west on Bowman Road is
occupied by houses built on large lots zoned R-2 Single Family.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On July 3,2001 a change was made from Low Density Residential,Mixed Office
Commercial,and Neighborhood Commercial in an area bounded by Bowman
Road,and Panther Creek within a 1 mile radius to the west of the applicant's
property to reflect existing conditions.
On January 16,2001 a change was made from Mixed Use,and Suburban Office
to Commercial and Office at the southeast corner of l-430 and Col.Glenn Road
about a A mile southeast of the application area to accommodate proposed
development.
On September 19,2000 a change was made from Low Density Residential and
Mixed Office Commercial to Mixed Use at W.36'treet and Bowman Road just
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-11-02
north of the study area to accommodate proposed development.
On April 6,1999 a change was made from Office and Community Shopping to
Mixed Office Commercial at Col.Glenn Road and Bowman Road about 1/3 of a
mile southwest of the amendment area to accommodate proposed development.
The applicant's property covered by this application is shown as Multi-family on
the Future Land Use Plan.Part of the applicant's property includes Brodie
Creek,which is shown as Park/Open Space.The small portion of the applicant's
property fronting W.36'"Street is shown as Mixed Office Commercial.The
property to the north of W.36 Street is shown as Mixed Use.The property to
the east of 1-430 is shown as Suburban Office.The land to the south is shown
as Mixed Office Commercial.The property to the north and west of the
application area at the corner of Bowman Road and W.36'treet is shown as
Mixed Office Commercial.A strip of Park/Open Space is shown along the
floodway of Brodie Creek next to the north boundary of the application area.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
l-430 is shown on the Master Street Plan as a freeway.W.36'treet and
Bowman Road are shown as Minor Arterials.A Class III bikeway is shown on W.36'"Street from Bowman Road to Rock Creek.Any development in this area will
need to be designed in such a way as to consider the traffic impact on W.
36'treetandtheaccompanyingbikeway.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that part of the
applicant's property is located in the Potential Greenbelt at Brodie Creek.This
Potential Greenbelt serves as an area that may be used for either recreational
uses,and or open space opportunities.The Potential Greenbelt also covers the
flood plain of Brodie Creek,which is also shown as Park /Open Space.
Development of the applicant's property would need to respect the integrity of
the watershed and the viability of the Potential Greenbelt.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-11-02
ANALYSIS:
The area shown as Multi-family is an isolated parcel of land.The applicant's
property has a small frontage on W.36 Street where the property crosses
Brodie Creek at the southwest corner of I-430 and W.36 .The area shown as
Multi-family fronts l-430 and can only be accessed from neighboring properties.
The land shown as Mixed Office Commercial at the intersection of Bowman
Road and W.36'treet is zoned R-2 Single Family (and a small area zoned
MF-12 Multi-family)and would require a re-zoning to allow the development of
any non-residential uses.The area to the south,shown as MOC and zoned C-2,
might require a re-zoning depending on the type of development.A change to
Mixed Office Commercial at this location would create a large block of Mixed
Office Commercial bounded by l-430,Col.Glenn Road,Bowman Road,and W.36'"Street.
Although the area shown MOC would be expanded,this amendment would not
change the area shown as Park/Open Space on the Future Land Use Plan.
Although this amendment would result in a large block of land of that would be
shown as MOC,the area shown as MOC would be split by an area shown as
PK/OS.Brodie Creek and the accompanying strip of PK/OS would effect the
viability of the neighboring areas shown as MOC with the presence of a
floodplain dividing the block shown as MOC.Currently,the property located in
the area covered by this amendment is in the process of being combined with
the property to the south,which would result in a single ownership for all of the
land south of Brodie Creek.This change would reflect the likely development
pattern with the property to the south.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations;Campus Place
Property Owners Association,Kensington Place Property Owners Association,
Pennbrook/Clover Hill Place Property Owners Association,Sandpiper
Neighborhood Association,Twin Lakes "A"Neighborhood Association,Twin
Lakes "B"Special Improvement District,Twin Lakes "B"Prop.Owners
Association,Westbrook Neighborhood Association,Birchwood Neighborhood
Association,and John Barrow Neighborhood Association.Staff has received 1
comment from an area resident in support of the change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.This change will result in uniform use
coverage for this area.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-11-02
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval.A motion was made
to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes
and 1 absent.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2.1 FILE NO.:Z-7336
Owner:Colonel Glenn/Bowman Road Development 1,LLC
Applicant:McGetrick and McGetrick Engineering
Location:Southwest corner of West 36'treet and Interstate 430
Request:Rezone from MF-12 to C-2
Size:19.207 acres
Purpose:Future commercial development
Existing Use:Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Undeveloped and wooded (across West 36'"Street);zoned POD
(future church site)
South —Undeveloped and wooded;zoned C-2
East —Undeveloped 0-2 and OS zoned property across Interstate 430
West —Single family residences on large tracts and some undeveloped
property;zoned R-2
A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Show the limits of the regulated floodplain and floodway on the survey.
Easements or public dedication of the floodway plus a 25'uffer alongeachsideofthefloodwaywillberequired.
B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The property is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7336
C.PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet
who could be identified,and the Sandpiper and John Barrow
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the rezoning request.
D.LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the l-430 Planning District.The Land Use Plan
shows Multi-family for this property.The applicant has applied for C-2
Shopping Center for future commercial development.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Office Commercial is a
separate item on this agenda.
Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of
Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
E.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request before the Commission is to rezone 19.207 acres of property
at the southwest corner of Interstate 430 and West 36 Street from"MF-12"Multifamily to "C-2"Shopping Center District.The applicant has
also requested a land use plan amendment from multifamily to Mixed
Office Commercial,which is Item 2.on this agenda.The purpose of the
rezoning is to combine this property with the approximate 85 acres of C-2
zoning immediately south for a unified commercial development.The
properties are owned by the same developer.The property proposed to
be rezoned is currently undeveloped and mostly wooded.There is a
creek (floodway)which runs generally southwest to northeast through the
northern portion of the property.Approximately seven (7)acres of the
property is in the floodway.Additionally,approximately two (2)acres of
the property is located between the floodway and West 36'"Street.
Staff supports the proposed C-2 rezoning only for the southern portion of
the property which is not in the floodway.Staff feels that the request to
rezone this property and combine it with the existing C-2 zoned property
for a unified shopping center development along the west side of
Interstate 430 is reasonable.Staff recommends that the portion of the
property which is located in the floodway be zoned to "OS"Open Space
District.In addition,staff recommends that the approximate two (2)acre
portion of the property located at the north tip of the site,between the
floodway and West 36'"Street,remain as MF-12 zoning at this time,with
a rezoning to be addressed at a later date when the property is proposed
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:2.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7336
for development.Staff feels that it is very possible that this northern piece
will be combined with property to the west for a larger future development.
Staff believes that the rezoning as described within this paragraph will
have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-2 zoning for the portion of
the property south of the existing floodway.Staff recommends that the
portion of the property located in the floodway be zoned to OS,with the
north portion located between the floodway and West 36'"Street to
remain zoned MF-12.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:LU03-11-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -I-430 Planning District
Location:Aldersgate Rd.at 18th St.
~Reneat:Single Family to Office
Source:Matthew Finley,Finley 8 Company
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the l-430 Planning District is for a change from
Single Family to Office.The Office category represents services provided directly
to consumers (e.g.,legal,financial,medical)as well as general offices,which
support more basic economic activities.The applicant wishes to develop the
property for office uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is vacant land zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately 1.94+
acres in size.The land to the north,east,and south is zoned R-2 Single Family
and is occupied by houses.Further to the north is a vacant fifty-foot strip of land
zoned OS Open Space between the R-2 zoned houses to the north of the
applicant's property and the land zoned 0-2 Office and Institutional,occupied by
two office buildings.One lot to the northeast is zoned R-7A for a manufactured
home.The land to the west across Aldersgate Road is zoned Planned Office
Development for two office buildings.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On November 4,2002 a change was made from Office to Commercial on John
Barrow Road north of Kanis Road about 1 mile northeast of the study area to
reflect existing conditions.
On September 4,2001 a change was made from Park/Open Space to Multi-
Family at 24"Street and Junior Deputy Road about "/4 of a mile to the southeast
of the applicant's property to accommodate new multi-family residential
development.
On July 17,2001 a change was made from Single Family and Commercial to
Park/Open Space on Birchwood Drive about 1 mile northwest of the application
area to reflect existing conditions.
On March 6,2001 a change was made from Single Family to Office at 1911
John Barrow Road about 1 mile east of the application area to accommodate a
proposed office development.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-11-01
On September 19,2000 a change was made from Single Family to Office at
2109 John Barrow Road about 1 mile east of the study area to accommodate a
proposed office development.
The applicant's property is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan.
All of the land to the north,east,and south is shown as Single Family while the
land to the west across Aldersgate Road is shown as Suburban Office.About a
block north of the applicant's property,north of the neighboring residences,the
land is shown as Suburban Office.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Aldersgate Road is a two-lane street with open drainage and is shown as a
Collector Street on the Master Street Plan and would require improvements in
order to conform to design standards.West 18'"and Perry Streets are
residential streets with open drainage that need improvements to conform to
design standards for standard residential streets.There are no bikeways shown
in the Master Street Plan that would be affected by this amendment.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the
applicant's property lies in a service deficit area.Adequate park facilities would
need to be developed in order to meet any new demands created by
development on the applicant's property.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant's property lies in an area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan.The business and commercial development goal
contains the objectives of attracting job-generating businesses to the area and
encouragement of land assembly guidelines for construction of new business
and commercial facilities.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-11-01
ANALYSIS:
This application would place an intense use in an area,which is surrounded on
three sides by less intense uses.Although the area shown as Single Family
contains vacant pieces of property,new housing is being constructed in this
neighborhood.The Plan has tried to keep the non-residential uses west of
Aldersgate Road.Even when allowing these non-residential uses,they were to
be designed such that residential could be a viable option on the east side of
Aldersgate.The Office use along Kanis Road includes an open space strip as a
boundary or barrier to further non-residential use along the east side of
Aldersgate Road.This amendment would extend non-residential use in a
residential area that is currently buffered from more intense land uses.
In addition,this amendment area is located in an area of revitalizing single-family
development.The property in question is located in the Hicks Interurban
Addition,a neighborhood that has seen an increase in building permit activity
within the past five years.Thirteen building permits for new single-family houses
have been issued for the neighborhood within the past five years.Four of those
permits were issued in 2001,while five were issued during 2002.The trend of
increasing building permits for single family housing east of Aldersgate Road
indicates that this neighborhood is a growing and viable single-family residential
area.This amendment would introduce a use that is incompatible with the
current trend of single-family residential development in the area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Campus Place
Property Owners Association,Kensington Place Property Owners Association,
Pennbrook/Clover Hill Place Property Owners Association,Twin Lakes "A"
Neighborhood Association,Twin Lakes "B"Special Improvement District,Twin
Lakes "B"Prop.Owners Association,Westbrook Neighborhood Association,
Birchwood Neighborhood Association,and John Barrow Neighborhood
Association.Staff has received has not received any comments from area
residents or Neighborhood Associations at this time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change not appropriate.This amendment would introduce a
non-residential use in an area of increasing single-family residential
development.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-11-01
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the February 20,
2003 Planning Commission meeting.A motion was made to pass the by-laws
waiver for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting.
That motion was approved with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.A
motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote
of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3.1 FILE NO.:Z-7337
Owner:Charles T.Meyer III and Caroline Meyer Finley
Applicant:Finley and Company Real Estate Services
Location:Northeast corner of Aldersgate Road and West 18'"Street
Request:Rezone from R-2 to 0-3
Size:Approximately 2.0 acres
Purpose:Future office development
Existing Use:Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Single family residences;zoned R-2 and R-7A
South —Single family residences;zoned R-2 (across West 18'treet)
East —Single family residences and vacant lots;zoned R-2
(across Perry Street)
West —Office park;zoned POD (across Aldersgate Road)
A.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Traffic impact studies may be required with future commercial
development on Aldersgate Road.
B.PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The property is located on a CATA Bus Route ¹3 (part-time route).
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7337
C.PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All property owners within 200 feet of the site,all residents within
300 feet who could be identified,and the John Barrow,Twin Lakes "A",
Twin Lakes "B"and Twin Lakes (POA)Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the rezoning request.
D.LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the l-430 Planning District.The Land Use Plan
shows Single Family for this property.The applicant has applied for an
0-3 General Office rezoning for a proposed office development.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Office is a separate item on
this agenda.
Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan.The business and commercial development
goal contains the objectives of attracting job-generating businesses to the
area and encouragement of land assembly guidelines for construction of
new business and commercial facilities.
E.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The request before the Commission is to rezone approximately 2.0 acres
(Lots 1-6 and 19-24,Block 16,Hicks Interurban Addition)from "R-2"
Single Family District to "0-3"General Office District.The applicant
proposes to rezone the property for future office development.The
property is currently undeveloped and tree-covered,and designated as
Single Family on the City's Future Land Use Plan.A land use plan
amendment from Single Family to Office is a separate item on this
agenda (Item 3).
Staff does not support the proposed rezoning.Staff feels that the
proposed rezoning to 0-3 will not be compatible with the single family
properties to the north,south and east.Staff views the POD zoned
property to the west (Suburban Office on the Land Use Plan)as a buffer
between Interstate 430 and this area of single family residential.
Additionally,when the property further north (along the south side of Kanis
Road)was zoned 0-2,an OS zoned buffer strip was required along the
south boundary line of the 0-2 zoning to serve as a dividing line between
the office uses and the single family property to the south,and protect the
integrity of this single family area.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:3.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7337
During the past two (2)years,several building permits for new homes
have been issued within the R-2 zoned area between Aldersgate Road
and Junior Deputy Road,south of the 0-2 zoned area along the south
side of Kanis Road.Staff feels that allowing non-residential zoning within
this area would be a detriment to an area which appears ripe for new
single family in-fill development.
F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the requested 0-3 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter
requesting that the application be deferred to the February 20,2003 agenda.
Staff supported the deferral request.
With a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent,the Commission voted to waive
their bylaws and accept the deferral request being less than five (5)working days
prior to the public hearing.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the February 20,2003 agenda.A motion to that
effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
The application was deferred.
3
January 9,2u03
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:Z-3789-I
NAME:Agape Church —Tower Use Permit
LOCATION:701 Napa Valley Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT:Agape Church/T-Mobile
c/o Site Excell
PROPOSAL:A tower use permit is requested to allow for the
placement of a 150 foot tall monopole tower on this
R-2 zoned property.Variances are requested from
the WCF support structure setback requirement and
the WCF landscape and screening requirements.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The tower is to be located on the lower perimeter of the Agape Church
property.The church is located on the east side of Napa Valley Road,
south of St.Charles Blvd.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The tower site is located on the southern fringe of the Agape Church
property.The church property wraps around the north,west and east
perimeters of the tower site.A wooded hillside separates the site from an
apartment complex located to the south.The proposed new monopole is
to replace a 97 foot tall,lattice tower.The new tower should be less
visibly obtrusive than the lattice tower,although it is taller.A second,
monopole tower is located immediately adjacent to the proposed tower
site.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the St.Charles and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The tower lease area is located in a lower parking lot of the large,Agape
Church site.Access to the lease area is through the church's parking lot.
There is more than sufficient parking immediately around the lease area
to accommodate any technicians who might visit the site.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3789-I
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
WCF landscaping and buffer requirements apply.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments received.
Water:No objection.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
~CPI t:N d t t d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Chris Villines was present representing the application.Staff briefly reviewed the
proposed Tower Use Permit with the Committee,noting that some additional
information was needed from the applicant.
Chris Villines gave a description of the proposed tower.He noted that the
additional information and a letter agreeing to allow collocation of two additional
wireless providers would be provided to staff.The variances associated with the
proposed tower were briefly discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for resolution.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3789-I
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The Agape Church occupies a large tract of R-2 zoned property located at 701
Napa Valley Drive.In addition to the usual buildings,parking lots and facilities
normally associated with a large church,the site also contains two towers and
associated equipment buildings.Both towers are located in a lower parking lot at
the southwest perimeter of the site.A 180 foot tall monopole tower holds the
antennae of several wireless communication companies.This tower and its
associated equipment building and cabinets are located within a fenced
compound.On February 5,202,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.
18634 which approved a waiver of the WCF landscape requirements on all four
perimeters of the site and of the requirement to place an 8 foot tall wood
screening fence on 3 of the 4 perimeters.The fence was required on the
perimeter adjacent to the southwest.
The second tower on the site is 97 foot tall lattice,self-support tower that holds
transmitting equipment for Agape Church's television broadcasts.T-Mobile,a
wireless communication provider,proposes to construct a 150 foot tall monopole
tower on the site within a few feet of the lattice tower.Agape Church will
relocate their equipment onto the new tower and the lattice tower will be razed
and removed.The new tower will be constructed to support 3 wireless
communication carriers in addition to the television antennae.Although the
proposed tower is.within the allowable height,there are two issues that prompt
the requirement of a tower use permit.The proposed tower is located 42 feet
from the property line separating the church site from the apartment complex to
the southwest.Section 36-593(b)(3)requires the tower to be set back a distance
at least the height of the tower from abutting residential properties.T-Mobile is
also requesting a deferral of the WCF landscape requirements on all 4
perimeters of the lease area and of the wood fence screening requirement on 3
of the 4 perimeters.T-Mobile will install the required 8 foot tall wood fence in the
southwest perimeter of the WCF lease area,in line with the fence on the
adjacent WCF lease compound that was previously approved by the Board of
Directors.
Staff is supportive of the requested Tower Use Permit and of the landscape and
screening deferrals.Three of the four perimeters of the lease area face directly
into the parking lot of Agape Church and are not visible from any abutting
properties.A wooded hillside separates the tower site from the adjacent
apartment complex.The nearest apartment building is over 200 feet from the
tower site.The tower site is at a much higher elevation than the apartment
property.The change in elevation,the wooded hillside and the wood screening
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3789-I
fence will provide adequate screening of the base of the tower site when viewed
from the apartment property.Due to the nature and location of this site,it is not
reasonable to require the full landscaping and screening on all 4 perimeters of
the tower site.
On December 20,2002,the applicant submitted the information requested at the
Subdivision Committee meeting,including a letter agreeing to allow at least two
additional wireless carriers to locate on the tower.
Staff supports a deferral of the landscaping and screening until such time as a
"major change in circumstance"as defined in Section 36-593(c)(6)of the Code.
Section 36-593(c)(6)states a "major change in circumstance"means that:
(1)the area within 200 feet of the boundaries of the WCF tower site has
developed to the point that there is a virtually unobstructed view of the
tower site from any adjoining occupiable residential structure or from
public property or right-of-way,and
(2)the City has received a complaint from the owner of an occupiable
structure located within 200 feet of the tower site that the site has
insufficient landscaping or screening in place;and
(3)the City has requested that the parties resolve the issue by agreeing to
certain screening or landscaping requirements consistent with LRC
f36-593 which can be granted administratively by the Director of
Planning and Development,but no agreement has been reached,or
sufficient additional space around the site has been acquired to meet the
landscaping,setback and screening requirements of LRC f36-593.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the tower use permit.
Staff recommends approval of a setback variance to allow the tower to be
located 42 feet from the abutting residentially zoned property.
Staff recommends approval of a deferral of the landscape requirements on all 4
perimeters of the WCF lease site and of the screening requirements on the
north,east and west perimeters of the WCF lease site until such time as a "major
change in circumstance"as defined in Section 36-593(c)(6)of the Code.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-3789-I
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:Z-5786-C
NAME:Southwest Christian Academy —Revised Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:11301 Geyer Springs Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:James and Sharon Stewart
PROPOSAL:A revision to a previously approved conditional use
permit is requested to allow for placement of a
multisectional manufactured home on this R-2
zoned private school campus to serve as a
caretaker/security residence.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The school is located on the east side of the south end of Geyer Springs
Road,near the city limits.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The proposed caretaker/security residence is to be located on the existing
school campus.Large tracts of undeveloped,wooded property are
located around the school site.With compliance with the siting standards
for such structures,the multisectional manufactured home should not
affect the school's continued compatibility with the surrounding
neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR United for
Progress,O.U.R.and Santa Monica Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the proposed caretaker/security residence will be through the
school parking lot.A gravel driveway will be extended off of the paved
parking lot to the home.The gravel drive will be removed when phase II
and III parking lots are constructed.There is adequate parking available
on the site to accommodate the home.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5786-C
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Since the proposed structure addition is less than ten (10)percent of
existing structures on this site,no additional landscaping upgrade is
required.Previous comments from past reviews would still apply.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.The applicant previously received a deferral of Master Street Plan
construction and right-of-way dedication through 2004.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:No objection.If a separate water meter is needed it would have
to be located next to the existing meter.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
C ttPI t d:N C t t d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
James Stewart was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described
the Revised Conditional Use Permit,noting that additional details were needed
on the proposed manufactured home.Staff also noted that a letter giving the
current status of the previously approved phased development plan was needed.
Mr.Stewart stated that the letter and additional information would be provided.
The siting criteria for manufactured homes was briefly discussed.Mike Hood,of
Public Works,reminded the applicant that a deferral of right-of-way dedication
and street improvements expires in 2004.Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,
noted that no additional landscaping would be required with this application.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5786-C
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee forwarded the
application to the full Commission for final action.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Southwest Christian Academy,a private school with classes from preschool
through 12'"grade,is located on the R-2 zoned,12'cre tract at 11301 Geyer
Springs Road.On February 8,1994,the Commission approved a conditional
use permit which allowed for the initial construction of the school.The school,
which had been operating in the adjacent church,was approved for an
enrollment of 240 students,ages infant through 9'rade.The initial
construction included one multipurpose building and three portable classrooms
on 3.5 acres.On April 25,1996,the Commission approved a revision to the
conditional use permit,allowing enrollment to increase to 444 students,ages
infant through 12'"grade.The 1996 revision included the construction of a new
classroom building,an addition to the previously approved building and a storage
building;all still on the original 3.5 acre tract.On March 30,2000,the
Commission approved another revision to the conditional use permit allowing for
the phased expansion of the school onto an adjacent 8a acre tract and an
increase in enrollment to 700 students,ages infant through 12'"grade.
The approved Master Plan consists of the following four phases:
Phase One:Construction of a new gymnasium,asphalt parking lots,curb cut
and access,and asphalt driveway connecting to the existing campus to the
north.Additionally,a new concrete driveway would be constructed off of Geyer
Springs Road connecting to the new parking Iot near the gym.The height of the
gymnasium at its apex will be no greater than 40 feet.The construction of the
gym would be a metal building with a sloped roof.Curb and gutter would be
provided around the asphalt parking areas.Increase enrollment capacity from
444 to 500 students.
Phase Two:Construction of nine new classrooms attached to the gymnasium
discussed in Phase I above.The construction type for the classrooms would be
a metal building.Increase enrollment capacity to 700 students.
Phase Three:Construction of an additional 58 parking spaces in the parking
area east of the new building constructed in Phase I.
Phase Four:Construction of a football stadium complete with concession stand
and seating capacity of 1,500.
Phase I and a portion of the Phase II parking have been completed.The school
has an agreement to utilize the adjacent church parking lot,as needed.The
school is now requested permission to place a 52'28',multisectional
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5786-C
manufactured home on the south side of the campus to serve as a
caretaker/security residence.The campus is fairly isolated and there have been
several instances of theft and vandalism over the past years.It is felt that having
an on-site caretaker will reduce such incidents.The proposed residence is a
2002 Fleetwood home.The exterior finish is white vinyl siding and trim.The
home has a pitched roof and will be sited to comply with city code.Access to the
home will be through the school campus.A gravel driveway will extend to the
home,from the existing driveway and parking lot.The home will have a setback
of 30 feet from the south property line.As was previously mentioned,the school
is fairly isolated.Other than for the church adjacent to the north,surrounding
properties are heavily wooded and undeveloped.
Staff is supportive of the requested revision to the conditional use permit.On
December 18,2002,the applicant submitted responses to issues raised at
Subdivision Committee.Those responses are reflected in the analysis above.
No other changes to the previously approved phasing plan or enrollment are
proposed.The proposed multisectional manufactured home is not out of
character with development in the area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested revised conditional use permit
subject to compliance with the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the previously approved phasing plan.
2.Compliance with the staff comments and condition outlined in Sections 4,
5 and 6 of this report.
3.Placement of the home must comply with the following siting criteria of
Section 36-254(d)(5)of the Code:
a.A pitched roof of three (3)in twelve (12)or fourteen (14)degrees or
greater.
b.Removal of all transport elements.
c.Permanent foundation.
d.Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with the neighborhood.
e.Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent structures.
f.Underpinning with permanent materials.
g.All homes shall be multisectional.
h.Off-street parking per single-family dwelling standard.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5786-C
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
James Stewart was present,representing the application.There was one (1)
person present in opposition.Staff briefly described the revised conditional use
permit,with a recommendation of approval.
Janet Berry,of Southwest Little Rock United for Progress,addressed the
Commission in opposition to the revised conditional use permit,as filed.She
stated that her association could accept a manufactured home at this location
with the following two (2)conditions:
1.A three (3)year time limit on the placement of the manufactured home,
with Planning Staff and SWLR UP review to determine if the
security/caretaker aspect is working.
2.The manufactured home be placed in a location less visible from Geyer
Springs Road.
James Stewart addressed the Commission in support of the application.He
noted that the proposed home would not be visible by northbound traffic on
Geyer Springs Road,based on the fact that the property immediately south is
wooded and partially in the floodway.He noted thai there would be a
considerable investment in the manufactured home and that a time limit would
not be acceptable.He stated that a six (6)foot tall wood fence could be placed
between Geyer Springs Road and the home to help screen it from the street.He
described the school campus,noting that he had experienced considerable theft
and vandalism in the past.He described the existing school security system.
Commissioner Floyd noted that it was not fair to place a time limit on the
structure if it was going to be placed on a permanent foundation as required.He
asked Mr.Stewart if he was amending the application to include the six (6)foot
wood fence,running north-south along the west side of the manufactured home.
Mr.Stewart stated that he would amend the application.
There was a motion to approve the revised conditional use permit as
recommended by staff and amended by the applicant.The motion passed by a
vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application as amended was
approved.
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
NAME:Little Rock Christian Academy —Revised Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:19010 Cantrell Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Little Rock Christian Academy/The Wilcox Group
PROPOSAL:A revision to a previously approved conditional use
permit is requested to allow for expansion of this
existing private school.The property is zoned R-2.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The school is located on the north side of Cantrell Road,between The
Ranch and Chenal Parkway.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The campus is located in an area of mixed uses and zoning located along
Cantrell Road.The properties to the east contain a variety of uses
including residential,commercial and office.Undeveloped tracts are
located directly to the west and north.The Cantrell/Chenal intersection is
just west of the site.This intersection includes a mixture of uses,
including the proposed new Walmart Supercenter.Undeveloped tracts
and a scattering of single family residences is located to the south.
Expansion of this existing campus should not affect the school's
continued compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Aberdeen and Maywood
Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
At total build-out,the school is to have 83 classrooms,housing 1,700
students.The break-down of classes by grades and the parking
requirement is as follows:
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
GRADES ¹OF CLASSROONIS PARKING SPACES
REQUIRED
ELEMENTARY
KINDERGARTEN 12 21
(210 Students)
1 GRADE 6 6
2 GRADE 6 6
3 GRADE 6 6
4 "GRADE 6 6
5 GRADE 6 6
6 GRADE 6 6
MIDDLE SCHOOL
AND HIGH SCHOOL
7 GRADE 5 5
8 GRADE 6 6
9 "GRADE 6 3610™GRADE 6 36
11 GRADE 6 3612™GRADE 6 36
TOTAL NUMBER OF 83 212
CLASSROOMS
The school is proposed to have 170 employees (faculty).One parking
space is required for each teacher,employee and administrator.
Combining the 170 required faculty spaces with the 212 required
classroom/student spaces results in a total parking requirement of 382
on-site parking spaces.
The site currently has 267 on-site parking spaces.Phase I of this revision
is the construction of an additional driveway and 153 more parking
spaces.Phase 8,which coincides with the construction of the
kindergarten building,includes the development of an additional 134
parking spaces;resulting in a total of 554 on-site parking spaces.
With the construction of all Phases,the site will have over a mile of
driveways to provide stacking space for vehicles.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for landscaping meet with ordinance requirements.
The proposed sidewalk along Cantrell Road cannot count as part of the
forty (40)foot wide landscape buffer area required by the Highway 10
Design Overlay District.Therefore,it appears the track needs moved
slightly northward in order to satisfy the forty (40)foot landscape strip
width requirement.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Curb and gutter,or another approved border will be required to protect
landscaped areas from vehicular traffic.
A six (6)foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward,a wall,or dense evergreen plantings,is required along
the western perimeter of the site.
Prior to a building permit being issued,it will be necessary to provide
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial.Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be
required at all locations.The survey information indicates compliance.
2.Except for sidewalk construction,Master Street Plan improvements
were constructed with preVious development.Public Works does
support delaying sidewalk construction to Phase 5 or until adjacent
development installs sidewalks,whichever occurs first.
3.NPDES and grading permits are required prior to construction,site
grading,and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved.
4.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way
from AHTD,District VI.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.A new
detention basin location is indicated on the plans.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as
required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code.All requests
should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering.
7.Proposed driveway location does not meet spacing criteria of
150'rom
property line.Staff will support a variance.
8.Provide information on average and peak hour traffic entering and
exiting facilities and traffic control methods.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:Expansion of on site fire protection will be required.A Capital
Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s)will apply to this
project in addition to normal charges.This fee will apply to all
connections including metered connections off the private fire system.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
C~PI i:N C i C.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Representatives of the Wilcox Group were present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the revised conditional use permit,noting that additional
information pertaining to the proposed development needed to be provided.The
applicants noted that the baseball field would possibly be lighted and that the
field/track would not.The applicants indicated that the requested general
information would be provided to staff.There was a brief discussion regarding
where the city limits line was located in this area.
The Public Works requirements were discussed.It was noted that the
westernmost driveway does not meet the minimum 150-foot setback from the
west property line.The applicants noted that the drive would increase their on-
site stacking ability.The applicants noted that they would work with Public
Works on this issue.There was a brief discussion pertaining to the construction
of a sidewalk along Cantrell Road.The applicants noted that they would like the
sidewalk construction deferred to Phase V construction.It was noted that this
issue needed to be worked out with Public Works.Peak hour traffic to and from
this property was also discussed.Public Works noted that information on traffic
control methods needed to be provided.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,reviewed the landscape and buffer
requirements with the applicants and Committee.These requirements were
briefly discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for final action.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Little Rock Christian Academy currently occupies a 301 acre tract of R-2 zoned
property located at 19010 Cantrell Road.
On December 12,1995,the Planning Commission approved the first conditional
use permit to allow the school,then known as Walnut Valley Christian Academy,
to build a new campus on a 20-acre"site.The school was originally approved to
have an enrollment of 1,040 students with a staff of 100.
On June 26,1997,the Commission approved a revision to the conditional use
permit allowing for expansion of the school onto an adjacent 10-acre tract.
Enrollment stayed at 1,040 and employee numbers increased to 110.
On September 3,1998,the Commission approved a second revision to the
conditional use permit allowing for a change in the phasing plan and an increase
in enrollment to 1,100 students.Employee numbers stayed at 110.
On May 11,2000,the Commission approved a third revision to the conditional
use permit allowing for the introduction of a new phase.The site stayed at 301
acres and enrollment and employee numbers stayed at 1,100 and 110
respectively.
The school has now acquired an adjacent 201 acre tract and is requesting
approval of another revision to the conditional use permit allowing for the
expansion of the school and to increase the enrollment and employee numbers
to 1,700 and 170 respectively.
The new plan includes the introduction of several new buildings,a track and
practice field,a baseball field and additional parking.Some of the previously
approved buildings are being relocated on the new master plan.The existing
building summary and proposed phased construction plan are as follow:
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
EXISTING BUILDINGS
ELEMENTARY BUILDING 39,424 S.F.
MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING 23,000
ACTIVITIES BUILDING 15,200
GYM 20,000
ADMIN 2,900
FUTURE BUILDINGS
PHASE 1
PARKING
PHASE 2
MULTI-USE BUILDING AND 11,700 S.F.
PAVILION
PHASE 3
MIDDLE SCHOOL ADDITION 7,500
PHASE 4
PRACTICE FIELD AND TRACK
PHASE 5 8 6
HIGH SCHOOL 46,400
PHASE 7
BASEBALL FIELD
ADMIN ADDITION 1,400
PHASE 8
PARKING
CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT 27,000
PHASE 9
FIELD HOUSE 9,000
PHASE 10
FINE ARTS AUDITORIUM 36,300
SIDEWALK
PHASE 11
GYM 26,700
TOTAL CAMPUS AREA 264,924 S.F.
6
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:6 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6079-D
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the revised conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the site plan and the comments and conditions outlined in
Sections 4,5 and 6 of the staff report.
Staff does not support allowing a second ground-mounted sign.The sign at the
new driveway should be limited to a directional sign only.The maximum
allowable size for the sign at the main entrance is 10 feet in height and 100
square feet in area,as a large scale development.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
Staff noted that the applicant had agreed to the following additional condition:
A traffic study will be performed with the Phase 3 middle
school expansion to determine if a traffic signal is warranted.
If warranted,the signal will be installed by the applicant
concurrent with Phase 5 high school construction.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff with the additional
condition.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10
ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
7
January 9,2u03
ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:Z-7324
NAME:Harris Duplex —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:3223 Cobb Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Carson and Gregory Harris
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a two-family residence (duplex)on this
vacant,R-3 zoned lot.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the northeast corner of Cobb Street and West33"Street,in the John Barrow neighborhood.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This older residential neighborhood is characterized primarily by small,
single family homes on smaller lots and numerous vacant lots.The
subject property is a lot and a half,larger than most of the surrounding
properties.Each unit of the duplex contains two bedrooms.The slight
increase in density proposed by this application should be compatible with
the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association were notified of this request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A duplex is required to have three on-site parking spaces;1.5 per unit.
The applicant is proposing a two-car driveway off of Cobb Street and a
single car driveway at the rear of the site off of West 33'treet.The
proposed parking complies with ordinance requirements.The parking
pads will be paved.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7324
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:No objection.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
~Ct Pl i:N C I i d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Roshawn Harris was present,representing the application.Staff briefly
described the proposed duplex,noting that some additional information was
needed (building height,exterior treatment,roof pitch and fencing).Mr.Harris
indicated thai the requested information would be provided.
Staff noted that three (3)parking spaces would be required for the proposed
duplex.Staff suggested providing a parking pad off of 33"Street at the rear of
the residence.This issue was briefly discussed.
There being no further issue for discussion,the Committee forwarded the issue
to the full Commission for final action.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant,Harris Development Company,proposes to construct a two-family
residence (duplex)on the vacant,R-3 zoned lot located at 3223 Cobb Street.A
residence was previously located on the lot but was removed some years ago.
The structure will be one-story in height and will have a vinyl siding exterior.The
roof will be built on a 6:12 pitch and roofing material will consist of asphalt
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7324
shingles.Each unit will contain two bedrooms.A two-car driveway will be
located off of Cobb Street and a single-car driveway will be located off of West33'treet.The property consists of a lot and a half,making it larger than many
of the properties in the surrounding neighborhood.
On December 18,2002,the applicant submitted a revised site plan and an
addendum to his cover letter that addressed the issues raised at Subdivision
Committee.Those issues are delineated in the analysis above.
In staff's opinion,the proposed duplex should be compatible with the
neighborhood.The slight increase in density should not negatively impact the
surrounding neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5 and
6 of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:Z-7331
NAME:Klitz Accessory Dwelling —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:10,901 West 36'treet
OWNER/APPLICANT:Betty Klitz,et al
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
placement of a multisectional manufactured home on
this R-2 zoned property to serve as an accessory
dwelling.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of West 36'"Street,just west of
Shackleford Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in a sparsely developed area of the city.Vacant
R-2,C-2 and PRD zoned properties are located across 36 Street to the
north.Vacant R-2 zoned properties are located to the east and west.A
vacant industrial building is located on a large tract to the south.Several
nonresidential uses and a scattering of single family residences are
located farther north,along Shackleford and Old Shackleford.Numerous
manufactured and mobile homes are located both to the north and south
of the site.Allowing the proposed multisectional manufactured home on
this 3-acre tract is compatible with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the John Barrow,Kensington
and Westbrook Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Each home is required to have one on-site parking space.There is
sufficient parking available on the property.No new driveways are
proposed.Both the existing residence and the proposed accessory
dwelling will use the existing driveway off of West 36'"Street.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7331
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments received.
Water:No objection.Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional and/or
larger meter(s)are required.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
~CPN i:N C d i d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
The applicant was not present.Staff briefly reviewed the application with the
Committee,noting that some additional information was needed.It was noted
that staff would meet with the applicant and attempt to resolve any outstanding
issues prior to the public hearing.The Committee forwarded the application to
the full Commission for final action.
(Staff subsequently met with the applicant and received responses to the
requests for additional information.Those comments are included in the
following staff analysis).
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant proposes to place a 32'64'ultisectional manufactured home
on the R-2 zoned,3-acre tract located at 10901 West 36'"Street.The proposed
2
January 9,2U03
ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7331
home is a 2002 model Palm Harbor Home.The home will have a vinyl siding
exterior with a pitched,shingled roof.A porch addition will be constructed across
the front of the home.The applicant's handicapped sister occupies the site built
home currently existing on the site.The applicant states it is her desire to live
near her sister to provide assistance.The proposed accessory dwelling exceeds
the floor area of the existing home.A variance will be needed to allow the area
of the accessory dwelling to exceed the area of the principal dwelling.Access to
the home will be via the existing driveway.The applicant has stated that the
conditional use permit will be limited to her occupancy of the home.If,at some
point,Ms.Klitz or her immediate family no longer occupy the home it will be
removed from the property.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit.Allowing placement
of a second home on this 3-acre tract should have no effect on the surrounding
neighborhood.Numerous manufactured or mobile homes are located in the
general vicinity of the site.The development potential of this site may very well
be affected by possible commercial developments in the area and long-term
residential use may not be the highest and best use of the property.Allowing the
applicant to place this home on the site for the purpose of caring for her sister
seems a reasonable "holding"use of the site.
Placement of the home must comply with the siting criteria for manufactured
homes established in Section 36-254(d)(5)of the Code.
Separate utilities are requested.Staff is supportive of the request again because
it seems reasonable to allow two dwellings on this 3-acre tract.There is no
density issue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections
4,5 and 6 of this report.
2.Compliance with the following siting criteria in Section 36-254(d)(5)of the
Code:
a.A pitched roof of three (3)in twelve (12)or fourteen (14)degrees or
greater.
b.Removal of all transport elements.
c.Permanent foundation.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7331
d.Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with the neighborhood.
e.Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent structures.
f.Underpinning with permanent materials.
g.All homes shall be multisectional.
h.Off-street parking per single-family dwelling standard.
3.The conditional use permit to allow this multisectional manufactured home
is limited to occupancy of the home by Betty Klitz or members of her
immediate family.If at any time that limited occupancy should cease,the
home is to be removed from the property.
Staff recommends approval of separate utilities and of the variance to allow the
accessory dwelling to exceed the area of the existing principal dwelling.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:Z-7332
NAME:Ryan Accessory Dwelling —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:201 Crystal Court
OWNER/APPLICANT:Dave and Kathy Ryan
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of an accessory dwelling on this R-3
zoned property.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The site is located at the northeast corner of Crystal Court and Alpine
Lane,in the Hillcrest Neighborhood.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The surrounding neighborhood is virtually,entirely single family in nature;
consisting of larger single family residences on R-3 zoned lots.There are
a few accessory dwellings located in the overall neighborhood,including
one recently approved by the Commission on Ridgeway.The proposed
structure will be designed to complement the house and should be
compatible with the neighborhood.Although the ordinance does not
require it,staff would suggest that the Commission attach a condition that
one of the dwellings must be occupied by the property owner.This should
help assure continued compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Hillcrest Neighborhood
Association were notified of this request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The existing residence and proposed accessory dwelling are each
required one parking space.Two parking spaces are available in the
proposed garage and two additional spaces are available on the new
driveway.The proposed parking exceeds ordinance requirements.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7332
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:No objection.Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional and/or
larger meter(s)are required.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
C ttPI t d:N C t t d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Dave Ryan was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the
proposed accessory dwelling,noting that some additional information was
needed.Staff also noted that a variance needed to be requested for the
accessory structure's rear yard coverage.Mr.Ryan noted that the accessory
dwelling would be for a family member.
In response to a question from staff,Mr.Ryan noted that the exterior of the
accessory structure would match the single family residence.He also noted that
the height of the accessory structure would not exceed that of the existing house,
and that it would have no exterior stairs.
Staff noted that the driveway width from Alpine Drive needed to be reduced to 24
feet.This issue was briefly discussed.Mr.Ryan noted that he would work this
issue out with staff.
The existing sewer main location on this property was briefly discussed.Mr.
Ryan noted that he would meet with Jim Boyd of Little Rock Wastewater Utility to
work out details associated with this issue.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7332
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the conditional use permit to the
full Commission for final action.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-3 zoned property located at 201 Crystal Court is currently occupied by a
two-story,brick and frame single family residence and a detached,brick and
frame garage.The applicant proposes to remove the garage building and
construct in its place a new,two-story structure with a two-car garage on the
ground floor and an accessory dwelling on the second floor.The structure will
be 30.5'24'n area.The structure will have a drivit exterior,finished to match
the house.The roof will be finished with fiberglass shingles,again to match the
house.Total height of the structure will be approximately 25 feet.The stairway
to the accessory dwelling will be located within the interior of the structure.The
existing driveway to the garage will be reconstructed to 24 feet in width to
provide access to the new structure.The area of the accessory structure
exceeds the maximum allowable rear yard coverage of 30%.Approximately 540
square feet of the structure is located in the required rear yard,providing a
coverage of approximately 43 percent.No separate utilities are requested.
Utilities will be extended from the existing house.Two-story construction may be
used for accessory dwellings if the ground floor is used as a garage or accessory
storage.
Staff is supportive of the request.Accessory dwellings are not uncommon in this
neighborhood.Having no separate utilities ties occupancy of the accessory
dwelling in a stronger way to occupancy of the principal dwelling.Within the R-3
district,there is currently no requirement that one of the units be occupied by the
property owner.Such a condition exists in the R-2 district.Staff would suggest
attaching that condition to this approval,further assuring control over the
accessory dwelling and the property by the property owner.
On December 18,2002,the applicant submitted a revised site plan and
addendum to his cover letter that addressed the issues raised at Subdivision
Committee.Those issues are described in the staff analysis above.It was
determined that the sewer line had previously been relocated.Wastewater
Utility's comments now reflect that there are no outstanding issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5
and 6 of the staff report.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7332
2.Either the principal dwelling or the accessory dwelling must be occupied by
the property owner.
3.There are to be no separate utilities (proposed by the applicant).
Staff recommends approval of a variance to allow the accessory building to have
a rear yard area coverage exceeding 30%.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:10 FILE NO.:Z-7333
NAME:Gamble Day Care Center-Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:706 Nix Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Richard and Susanne Gamble
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
conversion of this existing,R-2 zoned residence into
a day care center.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the west side of Nix Road,between Arthur and
Laurel Oaks.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The properties immediately around this site are exclusively single family,
although the larger neighborhood does contain other uses.Recently
approved PDO's are located to the south,rear Kanis Road.A large
multifamily development is located several blocks to the north,at
Markham Street.A cellular tower is located to the southeast,across Nix
Road.Staff does have concerns about introducing this use at this
location.The proposal is not a day care family home where the primary
use of the structure remains residential.The proposed use is a 35-child
day care with no occupancy of the residence.In staff's opinion,the use
would be better located several blocks to the north or south,at Kanis or
Markham,not in the heart of this residential neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Parkway Place and
Gibralter Heights Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposed day care is to have 4 employees and a capacity of 35
children;requiring 7 on-site parking spaces.The applicant proposes to
modify the existing driveway by creating a circle for drop-off and stacking.
Nine parking spaces are proposed.The applicants are requesting that
they be permitted to utilize gravel for the parking and driveway,rather than
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7333
paving them.If the Commission approves that variance,the driveway
should be paved for a distance of 50 feet from the street to prevent gravel
being dragged into the street.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
The plan submitted needs clarification concerning areas to be used for
vehicular use and for buffers and landscaping.The plan will need to be
drawn to scale before a detailed review can be given.The buffer along
the northern perimeter is required to have a width of not less than nine (9)
feet.
A six (6)foot high wood fence with its face side directed outward,a wall,
or dense evergreen plantings,is required along the northern,southern
and western perimeters of the site.
Curb and gutter,or another approved border will be required to protect
landscape areas from vehicular traffic.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.The proposed use would classify Nix Road on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline.
2.Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan for a
minor commercial street.Construct one-half street improvement to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to
start of work.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:Does not have water service but it is available.Capital
Investment Charges apply based on the size of the meter in addition to
normal charges.
2
January 9,2u03
ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7333
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
~CPt t:NC "t
t d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Susan and Richard Gamble were present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed day care use,noting that additional information
was needed (number of children and employees,sign plan,hours of operation,
etc.).
Susan Gamble described the proposed day care/early childhood learning center
use.She noted that there would be no more than 35 students.
The issues associated with parking were briefly discussed.Staff noted that the
parking needed to be revised,providing the appropriate number of parking
spaces and maneuvering area.Staff also noted that a variance needed to be
requested to allow gravel parking.The Gambles discussed providing a circular
drive with parking.Mike Hood,of Public Works,noted that the circular drive
could have only one (1)entrance/exit,as the property was not wide enough for
two drives.Mr.Hood briefly explained the Public Works requirements to the
applicants.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,reviewed the landscaping and screening
requirements with the applicants and Committee.The applicants described the
existing landscaping/screening which exists on the property.
Commissioner Faust asked the Gambles if they had notified their neighbors.
Mr.Gamble indicated that some of the neighbors have been contacted about the
proposed day care,and that others would be contacted.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to the full
Commission for resolution.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-2 zoned,2-acre tract located at 706 Nix Road is occupied by a 2,880
square foot,one-story,brick and frame,single-family residence.The applicants
are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for conversion of the
home into a day care center.There would be no residential occupancy of the
structure,if approved.The day care is proposed to have a capacity of 35
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7333
children with 4 employees.Hours of operation are proposed to be Monday-
Friday,7:00 a.m.—6:00 p.m.A fenced playground area will be located behind
the house.The property currently has a gravel driveway.The applicants
propose to modify the driveway by constructing 9 parking spaces and creating a
circle to provide drop-off/stacking space.The existing driveway will be modified
at the street to allow two-way traffic.The applicants are requesting a variance to
allow use of gravel for the driveway and parking in lieu of pavement.No signage
Is ploposed.
Staff does have concerns about the proposed day care center.The subject
property is located in an exclusively single family neighborhood.Access to the
site is gained via Nix Road which,at the north end,is so narrow that traffic
warning signs are posted.The proposed use is not a "day care family home"
where the property retains its residential character and the operator lives in the
residence.The applicants propose to convert the structure into a day care
center with no continued residential use.Staff has concerns that the use is not.
compatible with the neighborhood.The day care center would be better located
further to the north or south,at Kanis or Markham,rather than in the "heart"of
the neighborhood.
Particular issues such as signage and the proposed use of gravel for the
driveway and parking can be discussed if the Commission is inclined to approve
the application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Richard and Susanne Gamble were present,representing the application.There
was one (1)person present in opposition.Staff briefly described the proposed
conditional use permit,with a recommendation of denial.
Susanne Gamble addressed the Commission in support of the application.She
described the proposed school use and how she proposed to operate the school.
She described other non-residential uses in the general area.
Richard Maddox addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed
conditional use permit.He noted that he lived near the end of Burkwood Drive
and adjacent to the proposed school site.He expressed concern with the
amount of traffic that would be generated on Nix Road by the school use.He
stated that the property should remain single family residential.
4
January 9,2U03
ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7333
Vice-Chairman Rahman asked if the use would be a day care or a school.
Mrs.Gamble explained that it would be a school.Vice-Chairman Rahman stated
that a day care would serve an immediate neighborhood,but a school would
have people coming from a much broader area.
There was a brief discussion regarding the number of children proposed for the
school use.
Commissioner Faust commented that the proposed school use was not
appropriate for this area.This issue was briefly discussed.
Commissioner Allen also commented that this was not an appropriate location
for the proposed school use.
There was further discussion related to the proposed school use and the
proposed location along Nix Road.
There was a motion to approve the conditional use permit,with further
discussion of conditions if the motion passed.The motion failed by a vote of
0 ayes,10 nays and 1 absent.The application was denied.
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:11 FILE NO.:Z-7334
NAME:T-Mobile Tower Use Permit
LOCATION:3100 I-30
OWNER/APPLICANT:R 8 W Properties/T-Mobile c/o Site Excell
PROPOSAL:A tower use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a 150 foot tall monopole tower on this
l-2 zoned property.A waiver of the WCF landscape
requirements is requested.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property fronts onto the west side of 1-30,4 blocks south of Roosevelt
Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The proposed tower site is located in the gravel covered parking
lot/storage area of an industrial property.The industrial building,
additional industrial properties and the old railroad biddle yards are
located to the south.The l-30 right-of-way is adjacent to the east.The
interstate is elevated several feet above the subject property.Single
family homes are located to the north and a multiple building housing
project is adjacent to the west.The site is visible from the west and is
somewhat visible through some trees from the north.The applicant
proposes to install the required 8 foot wood fence around the lease area.
With proper screening,the use should be compatible with the
neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR United for Progress
and Community Outreach Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the tower site is gained through the existing driveway and
parking lot of the Ozark Equipment Company.There is more than
adequate space on the site to accommodate the vehicle of any
technicians visiting the site.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7334
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
WCF landscaping and screening requirements apply.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy:No Comments received.
Reliant:No Comments received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comments received.
Water:There is an existing 2-inch water main in this vicinity.It needs to
be located to determine whether there is a conflict.If no one is served
off this main,it could be abandoned.If it needs to be relocated,that
work would be done at the developer's expense.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
~Ct Pl i N C I i d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Chris Villines was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described
the proposed tower,noting that a letter agreeing to allow collocation of two
additional wireless providers needed to be provided.The proposed tower
location was briefly discussed.
Commissioner Faust asked why the applicant was requesting a landscape
waiver.Mr.Villines explained that the tower location was within an outdoor
storage area,and the property owner needed to use as much of the area as
possible.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7334
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee forwarded the
application to the full Commission for resolution.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The I-2 zoned tract located at 3100 I-30 is occupied by Ozark Equipment
Company.The property contains an industrial building and paved and unpaved
parking and storage areas.The site is enclosed by a chain-link fence topped
with barbed wire.The site is located near the dead-end of the Frontage Road on
the west side of l-30.The interstate elevation is several feet above the elevation
of the subject property.The old,railroad biddle yard is located one tract to the
south of the site.T-Mobile,a wireless communication company,proposes to
construct a wireless communication facility (WCF)in a lease area on the
industrial site.The WCF will consist of a 150 foot tall monopole tower and
associated equipment cabinets.The WCF conforms to code regarding height
and setbacks.T-Mobile proposes to enclose the WCF site with the required,8
foot tall,wood privacy fence.Since the lease area is located in the gravel
covered parking/storage lot of this industrial use,T-Mobile is requesting a
deferral of the requirement to install the required landscape strip around the
perimeter of the WCF lease area.It is this landscape deferral that creates the
need for the tower use permit.
Staff is supportive of the requested tower use permit.The WCF is proposed to
be located on an industrial tract adjacent to an elevated interstate and near a
railroad yard.Although the base of the tower site is somewhat visible from the
residential properties located to the north and west,the WCF is over 150 feet
from each of those perimeters.The WCF is proposed to be located within the
gravel covered parking/storage lot and the wood fence should provide adequate
screening of the base of the WCF site without requiring the loss of additional
parking/storage space.
On December 20,2002,the applicant submitted a letter addressing an issue
raised at Subdivision Committee.The monopole tower will be designed to
accommodate at least two additional wireless carriers.
Staff supports a deferral of the landscaping and screening until such time as a
"major change in circumstance"as defined in Section 36-593(c)(6)of the Code.
Section 36-593(c)(6)states a "major change in circumstance"means that:
(1)the area within 200 feet of the boundaries of the WCF tower site has
developed to the point that there is a virtually unobstructed view of the
tower site from any adjoining occupiable residential structure or from
public property or right-of-way,and
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7334
(2)the City has received a complaint from the owner of an occupiable
structure located within 200 feet of the tower site that the site has
insufficient landscaping or screening in place;and
(3)the City has requested that the parties resolve the issue by agreeing to
certain screening or landscaping requirements consistent with LRC g36-
593 which can be granted administratively by the Director of Planning and
Development,but no agreement has been reached,or sufficient
additional space around the site has been acquired to meet the
landscaping,setback and screening requirements of LRC f36-593.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Tower Use Permit.
Staff recommends approval of a deferral of the landscape requirements on all 4
perimeters of the WCF lease site until such time as a "major change in
circumstance"as defined in Section 36-593(c)(6)of the Code.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
4
January 9,2o03
ITEM NO.:12 FILE NO.:Z-7335
NAME:Westside YMCA Family Center —Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION:South side of Denny Road,/2 mile West of Kanis
Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Deltic Timber/Lewis,Elliott and Studer
PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
development of a YMCA Family Center on this
undeveloped,R-2 zoned property.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south side of Denny Road,A mile west of
Kanis Road;between the Pulaski Academy site and the Wildwood Center
for performing arts.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located in an area characterized by large tracts of
undeveloped,heavily wooded properties and two other institutional uses.
The proposed Pulaski Academy campus is beginning to develop adjacent
to the east.The Wildwood Center for performing arts is to the west.This
family-oriented institutional use is compatible with uses in the area.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site were notified of
this issue.There are no residents within 300 feet and no neighborhood
associations within the vicinity of the site to notify of the issue.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The applicant proposes the construction of two parking lots containing
approximately 250 parking spaces.The site will be accessed via 3
driveways off of Denny Road.The first phase of the project is the outdoor
adventure area and a small area of parking.The remaining parking lots
and driveways will be constructed in connection with the building.
Projected maximum occupancy of the site is 400 persons.The proposed
parking lots should be sufficient.If it is found that additional parking is
needed,there is sufficient space on the site to accommodate it.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7335
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
It appears that areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.The plan submitted is a little unclear in defining
property lines.The average street buffer width required along Denny
Road is fifty (50)feet.The minimum width allowed at any given point is
twenty-five (25)feet.
An average land use buffer width of fifty (50)feet is required along the
southern,eastern and western perimeters.The land use buffer is
required to never drop below nine (9)feet in width.Utility easements
cannot count as part of the land use buffer area.
A six (6)foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward,a wall,or dense evergreen plantings,is required to help
screen this site from the residential properties to the south,east and west.
A small amount of building landscaping between the public parking areas
and building will be required.There is considerable flexibility with this
requirement.
Curb and gutter will be required to protect landscaped areas from
vehicular traffic.
Irrigation to water landscaped areas will be required.
Prior to a building permit being issued,it will be necessary to submit
landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible on this site.Extra credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving a tree of six (6)inch caliper or
larger.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Denny Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial.
A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.2.Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan.
Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
3.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7335
start of work.
5.A sketch grading and drainage plan will be required per Section 29-
188.
6.NPDES and grading permits are required prior to construction.A final
site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved
at that time.
7.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as
required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code.All requests
should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering.
8.Denny Road had a 2001 traffic count of 1100 vehicles per day.
9.Re-design main entrance drive to meet driveway spacing criteria of300'or a minor arterial.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is
required for project.
Entergy:15 feet along Denny Road and transmission right-of-way is
necessary and 30 feet along southeast property line for 30 overhead
primary if required.
Reliant:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
Water:On site fire protection may be required.A Capital Investment
Charge based on the size of connection(s)will apply to this project in
addition to normal charges.This fee will apply to all connections
including metered connections off the private fire system.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per code.
C ttPI t d:~C t t d.
CATA:No Comments received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
John McMorran and Pat McGetrick were present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the proposed development,noting that additional
information was needed.In response to a question from staff,Mr.McMorran
noted that there would be a day care use on the property.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7335
Mike Hood,of Public Works,discussed the Public Works requirements with the
applicants and Committee.He noted that a sketch grading and drainage plan
needed to be provided before the application goes to the full Commission.Mr.
McGetrick noted that a deferral of street improvements might be requested,
depending on the phasing plan.The driveway location and spacing
requirements were also discussed.The applicants indicated that the drives
would be moved to meet the minimum spacing requirements.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,reviewed the landscaping and buffer
requirements with the applicants and Committee.In response to a question from
the Committee,Mr.Brown noted that the Adventure and Challenge Course could
encroach into and occupy no more than 30 percent of the required buffer area.
The buffer area between this site and the Pulaski Academy site was briefly
discussed.
After the discussion,the application was forwarded to the full Commission for
final action.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The Westside YMCA Family Center is purchasing a 22-acre piece of R-2 zoned
property located on the west side of Denny Road approximately N mile
northwest of Kanis.The YMCA is applying for a conceptual conditional use
permit to allow for the phased construction of 75,000 sq.ft.Aerobics,Day Care,
and Multi-use Community Rooms.The site would include an outdoor aquatic
center and a little league baseball field,playgrounds,an outdoor adventure area
with a challenge course and parking for approximately 250 cars.The building
will have a brick and glass exterior with possible precast banding and entrance.
Most of the spaces discussed above are two-story in volume.There will
however,be a portion which will be two levels.
The site is heavily wooded and was selected for its natural beauty.The site also
has a significant rise near the middle of the property,which has lead to the
current layout.The building has been located near the road to avoid destroying
the whole site to overcome the hill.The outdoor aquatic center has been located
at the middle of a natural saddleback between two hills allowing the YMCA toterracesunshadestructuresandpicnicareasaroundthepool.The outdoor
adventure area will be designed around the natural site and will be the 1"phasetothisproject.
Signage has not been designed however it will be ground lit,will be constructedofbrick,precast and metal and will conform to City standards for office and
institutional uses and Chenal guidelines.Site lighting will be focused anddirectedonparkinglotsandballfields.There will be some ground lighting ontothebuildingaswell.Phasing of the development will be determined by the
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7335
availability of funds.However,as previously noted,the outdoor adventure area,
which will require very little disturbance of the natural terrain,will be the 1"
phase.This will require a minimal amount of parking and disturbance of natural
vegetation along the Denny Road frontage.The YMCA is requesting that this
initial parking area be accepted as a small gravel area or paved area with no
curb and gutter or additional landscaping.An undisturbed buffer,averaging 50
feet in width,will be located along the west,south and east perimeters.
Projected occupancy of the site is approximately 400 persons only at rare times,
based on usage history of existing facilities.The only fencing proposed is
around the ballfield and pool area.The outdoor adventure areas are to be left as
undisturbed as possible.The design of the trails and equipment will be centered
around the natural vegetation and terrain.
Staff and usage projections for the facility are as follow:
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES:
5-7 Full time employees
15-20 Part time employees January-May and September-December40-50 Part time employees June-August
PROJECTED HOURS OF OPERATION
Monday-Friday 6 a.m.—10:00 p.m.Year round
Saturday 8 a.m.—8 p.m.Year round
Sunday 12:00 Noon —8 p.m.Year round
PROJECTED USAGE
M-F 6 a.m.-2:30 p.m.Individual users,fitness classes,lap swimmers,
water aerobics classes,therapeutic fitness/wellness
2:30 —6 p.m.same as above plus school aged child care K —6'rade
6 p.m.—close same as 6 a.m.-2:30 p.m.
Saturday and Sunday all day family users,individual users,small groupusers,birthday parties.
June —August same as above plus summer day camp 7 a.m.—6 p.m.K-6'"Grade and 7'9'"Grade
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7335
The YMCA is requesting a deferral of the required /2 street improvements to
Denny Road until the building is constructed or 5 years.Additionally,the YMCA
is requesting a waiver of the required 6 foot high opaque screening fence along
the south,west and east perimeters due to the 50 foot wide undisturbed buffer
being retained.The YMCA is requesting the option of accessing utilities across
the buffers.The property is surrounded on 3 sides by major utility easements.
There are provisions in the code to allow utilities to traverse a buffer if the utilities
are perpendicular to the buffer.The applicant will need to work with staff to
address this issue.
Staff is supportive of the requested conditional use permit.The proposed site is
located in a sparsely developed part of the City,between two other institutional
uses;Pulaski Academy and Wildwood.The proposed use should be compatible
with other uses in the area.Large areas of undeveloped,heavily wooded
properties are located to the north and south.
On December 18,2002,the applicant submitted a revised site plan and
responses to staff issues raised at the Subdivision Committee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5
and 6 of the staff report.
2.Signage is to be limited to that permitted in office and institutional zones.
3.All site lighting is to be directional,aimed inward to the site.
4.The buffers on the south,west and east perimeters are to remain undisturbed
other than for utility crossings as approved by staff.
5.The small parking area proposed for Phase I is to be paved and properly
stripped.
Staff recommends approval of the requested deferral of /2 street improvements
to Denny Road until the building is constructed or 5 years,whichever occurs first.
Staff recommends that the undisturbed buffers on the west,east and south
perimeters be used to serve screening purposes in lieu of a wood fence.
6
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7335
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
7
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:G-25-186
Name:Rename a portion of S.Elm Street to Jack
Stephens Drive
Location:Elm Strget;south of West Markham Street to
West 7 Street
Petitioner:UAMS
Receuest:To rename that portion of,iElm Street,from
West Markham to West 7'treets,to Jack
Stephens Drive.
Abuitin Uses and Ownershi:
From Markham Street south to l-630,UAMS facilities occupy virtually every
property.The VA Medical Center abuts the west side of Elm Street,south of
Sheffield Drive.The VA has a 7'"Street address.A Little Rock Fire Department
station and a Burger King Restaurant are located at the southwest and southeast
corners of Markham and Elm Street respectively.Neither of these uses take an
Elm Street address.
Nei hborhood Effect:
Only UAMS facilities which might have an Elm Street address will be affected.
Elm Street is not a through street,dead-ending at l-630.Changing the name of
these 7 blocks of Elm Street,which serves primarily as a driveway within the
UAMS campus,will have no effect on the neighborhood.
Nei hborhood Position:
No opposition has been voiced by the three other abutting ownerships;LRFD,
Burger King and VA.The Capitol View-Stifft's Station Neighborhood
Association discussed the issue at its December 9,2002 meeting.The
association submitted a letter in which they stated there were no objections to
the request.
Effect on Public Services:
No opposition has been voiced by Public Utilities or Agencies.Up to seven
street name signs will need to be changed.
~AA A
UAMS is requesting that the name of Elm Street,south of Markham to l-630,be
changed to Jack Stephens Drive in recognition of Mr.Stephens'ontributions tothemedicalfacility.The street serves as not much more than a driveway
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:13 Cont.FILE NO.:G-25-186
through the UAMS campus.The future site of the Jack T.Stephens Spine and
Neuroscience Institute is located on the east side of Elm Street,south of West5'"Street.Other than UAMS only three other properties abut this portion of Elm
Street;VA Medical Center,a LRFD station and a Burger King restaurant.None
of the other properties take an address from Elm Street.Changing the name of
this portion of Elm Street will have no effect on Public Services or Utilities.The
street dead-ends at l-630,providing a clear delineation between this street and
Elm Street south of l-630.Markham provides a clear dividing line on the north.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 12,2002)
Allen Barnhardt and Alan Lowe were present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed street name change.Staff noted that Elm Street
from West Markham Street to 1-630..needed to be renamed to avoid confusion.
This issue was discussed.
Mr.Barnhardt asked who would provide the new street signage.Mike Hood,of
Public Works,noted that his department would work out these details with the
applicants.
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee forwarded the
proposed street name change to the full Commission for resolution.
STAFF RECOMMEDATION:
To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues.Staff recommends
approval of the requested street name change.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.A motion to that effect
was made.The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was approved.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -River Mountain Planning District
Location:Cantrell Road from Southridge Drive to Rummel Road
Re&coast:Transition,Low Density Residential,Multi-family,and Commercial
to Office,Suburban Office,Low Density Residential,Single Family,
Park/Open Space,and Public Institutional.
Source:City Staff
PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
¹1.From Transition to Suburban Office,located on the north side of Cantrell
Road east of Rummel Road,consisting of land developed for offices and a few
vacant parcels of land.
¹2.From Transition to Single Family,located on the south side of Cantrell at the
end of Westchester Court,consisting of houses located in the Westchester
Subdivision.
¹3.From Transition to Suburban Office,on the south side of Cantrell north of
Westchester Court,characterized by low-density development of houses built on
large lots and a vets office.
¹4.From Transition to Low Density Residential,on the north side of Cantrell at
Taylor Loop,also characterized by low-density development of houses built on
large lots.
¹5.From Transition to Commercial,on the north side of Cantrell at Taylor Loop,
to recognize an existing PCD.
¹6.From Transition to Suburban Office,on the west side of Taylor Loop north of
Westchester Court,consisting of residential lots and houses with half developedasbusinessuses.
¹7.From Transition to Suburban Office,east side of Taylor Loop north of
Westchester Court,consisting of houses and one office use.
¹8.From Transition to Single Family,on Jerry Drive south of Cantrell,containing
land platted for residential development in the Hoggard Subdivision.
¹9.From Transition to Suburban Office,south side of Cantrell at Jerry Drive is
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
characterized by office development in the commercial node located at the
Cantrell/Taylor Loop intersection.
¹10.From Transition to Suburban Office,on the north side of Cantrell west of
Pinnacle Valley Road,includes property developed with a restaurant and
houses.
¹11.From Transition to Single Family,on the west side of Pinnacle Valley Road
north of Cantrell,which is comprised of large lot residential and vacant land.
¹12.From Transition to Single Family,along Pine Mountain Road,comprised of
the houses located on Pine Mountain Road and vacant land located on the east
side of Pinnacle Valley Road.
¹13.From Transition to Single Family,on Cantrell at Westbury,consisting of
single-family houses in the built out Westbury Subdivision.
¹14.From Transition to Park/Open Space,on Cantrell at Ison Creek,which
contains vacant land in the floodway of Ison Creek.
¹15.From Transition to Suburban Office,on Cantrell next to Ison Creek,
consisting of two pieces of property developed with houses built on large lots.
¹16.From Transition to Suburban Office,on the north side of Cantrell at
Candlewood Drive,is characterized with low-density development with houses
built on large lots.
¹17.From Low Density Residential to Single Family,north of the end of Pine
Mountain Road,is vacant wooded land and has a newly platted five acres
subdivision on it.
¹18.From Transition to Low Density Residential,on the south side of Cantrell
along Crockett Street,consisting of property developed with houses built in the
Pankey subdivision.
¹19.From Transition to Suburban Office,on the south side of Cantrell west ofSamPeckRoad,containing tracts of undeveloped land.
¹20.From Transition to Office,on the north side of Cantrell at Sam Peck,
consisting of land developed for offices with vacant land available for future
development.
¹21.From Transition to Public Institutional,on the north side of Cantrell at SamPeckattheGraceCommunityChurch,containing a campus for church facilities.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
¹22.From Transition to Suburban Office,on the north side of Cantrell east of
Sam Peck,which may be characterized by a house,built on a large lot.
¹23.From Transition to Office,on the south side of Cantrell east of Sam Peck,
containing land developed for office uses.
¹24.From Transition to Single Family,on the south of Cantrell Road north of
Piedmont,includes land located in the Piedmont Addition.
¹25.From Transition to Public Institutional,on the south side of Cantrell west of
the Pleasant Ridge apartments,for St.Michaels Episcopal Church property.
¹26.From Multi-family to Single Family,on the north side of Cantrell across the
street from the Pleasant Ridge apartments,which consists of a vacant hillside.
¹27.From Transition to Office,on the north side of Cantrell at Pleasant Ridge
Road,containing land occupied by a bank and other office uses.
¹28.From Transition to Office,on the north side of Cantrell east of Southridge
Drive,consisting of land occupied by office uses.
¹29.From Commercial to Suburban Office,on the east side of Fairview Road
south of Pleasant Ridge Road,developed with houses.
The Office category represents services provided directly to the consumers (e.g.
legal,financial,medical)as well as general offices,which support more basic
economic activities.The Suburban Office category provides for low intensity
development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower density
residential areas to assure compatibility.A Planned Zoning District is required.
Low Density Residential accommodates a broad range of housing types
including single family attached,single family detached,duplex,town homes,
multi-family and patio or garden homes.Any combination of these and possiblyotherhousingtypesmayfallinthiscategoryprovidedthatthedensityisbetween
six (6)and ten (10)dwelling units per acre.Single Family provides for single-
family homes at densities not to exceed 6 dwelling units per acre.Such
residential development is typically characterized by conventional single family
homes,but may also include patio or garden homes and cluster homes,providedthatthedensityremainlessthan6unitsperacre.Park/Open Space includes all
public parks,recreation facilities,greenbelts,flood plains,and other spaces
designated as open space and recreational land.Public Institutional represents
public and quasi-public facilities that provide a variety of services to the
community such as schools,libraries,fire stations,churches,utility substations,
and hospitals.These proposed changes are intended to reflect existing
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
conditions along the Cantrell Road corridor in the River Mountain Neighborhood
Action Plan study area.With these changes,most of the area shown as
Transition along Cantrell Road would be eliminated.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The areas under consideration may be combined into four groups:
The first group (areas ¹1,-¹16.)starts at the Cantrell Road /Rummel Road
intersection and continues east to the Cantrell /Candlewood Drive intersection
and covers 75.5+acres of land.The north side of Cantrell Road west of the
Taylor Loop intersection (areas ¹1,-¹4.)is zoned Planned Development-Office,
Planned Office Development,and Planned Development-Commercial for an
assortment of offices and businesses while most of the residential land,both
developed and non-developed land,is zoned R-2 Single Family.Areas ¹6 and¹7 located on Taylor Loop Road south of the intersection with Cantrell is zoned
PDO and Planned Commercial Development for small business located in
houses,while the land zoned R-2 is used as residences.Area ¹8 is zoned R-2
for residences.Area ¹9,located on the east side of Jerry Drive is zone PCD and
POD for small business.Area ¹10 contains a PCD for a restaurant while area¹11 is vacant land zoned R-2.Area ¹12 on Pine Mountain Road is land zonedR-2 for houses.Area ¹13,covering the houses located on Westbury Drive is
zoned R-2.Area ¹14 is vacant land zoned R-2 next to Ison Creek.Area ¹15 is
property located between Ison Creek and Cantrell Road zoned R-2 for houses
built on large lots.Area ¹16,zoned R-2 is composed of houses built on large
lots.
The first group of changes is adjacent to two commercial nodes.The first
commercial node is located at the intersection of Cantrell Road and the east legofTaylorLoopRoadandhasavarietyofzoningclassificationssurroundingit.In
addition to the R-2 Single Family zoning,there is also the following non-
residential zoning:an area zoned PD-C (area ¹10)for a business located at
Cantrell Road and Pinnacle Valley Road,C-3 General Commercial for a
shopping center north of the Cantrell and Taylor Loop intersection (betweenareas¹5 and ¹10)and PDC for a small business to the east (area ¹10),while
the south side of Cantrell Road is zoned PCD and PDO for banks and
businesses east of the intersection while to the west of the intersection is a PODforabankandaPCDforavacantgrocerystore(between areas ¹3 and ¹6).The second commercial node is located at Cantrell Road and Candlewood DriveconsistsofashoppingcenteranchoredbyagrocerystorezonedC-3 and
includes some out parcels (situated on the east side of area ¹16).The oppositesideofCantrellRoadhastwopropertieszonedPDCforsmallbusinesses,a
large lot zoned C-3 for a mini-storage facility,and a lot zoned PCD for a small
shopping center (east of areas ¹14 and ¹15).
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
A second group (area ¹17)is actually a single isolated area of 24.6 +acres of
vacant land located east of Pinnacle Valley Road and north of the end of Pine
Mountain Drive and is zoned MF-12 Multi-family.
The third group (areas ¹18-¹26)is centered on the intersection of Cantrell and
Sam Peck Road.This group covers 54.6+acres of land on the north and south
side of Cantrell Road from Crockett Street to the west boundary of the Pleasant
Ridge Subdivision and is zoned POD,PDO,0-2,0-3,MF-12,and R-2.The
POD,PDO,0-2 Office and Institutional,and 0-3 General Office zoned areas
consists of offices and vacant land.The land zoned MF-12 is occupied by a
church.Most of the R-2 zoned area consists of large tracts of vacant land with a
few houses built on large lots.The third group also includes 11.2+acres of
vacant land zoned R-2 located on Cantrell Road across from the Pleasant Ridge
apartments.
The fourth group (areas ¹27 -¹29)is located at Southridge Drive and Pleasant
Ridge Road.Land there is zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial and PCD for
businesses at the intersections.There is also land zoned C-2 Shopping Center,
POD,and PCD occupied by a shopping center and office buildings,with some
vacant land available to accommodate future development.The mostly vacant
land southeast of the corner of Pleasant Ridge and Fairview Roads (north of
Summit Road)is zoned R-2.12.66+acres of this area are covered by the
proposed changes.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On June 4,2002 a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office at17005CantrellRoadtoreflectexistingconditionsabout1milewestofthestudyarea.
On July 17,2001 a change was made from Single Family to Park/Open Space at
Panky Park located at Russ and Piggee Streets near the center of the study area
to recognize the park.
On October 5,1999 a change was made from Office to Mixed Office CommercialatRanchDriveandCantrellRoadabout1milewestofthestudyareato
accommodate proposed development.
On April 20,1999 multiple changes were made from Single Family and Low
Density Residential to Park/Open Space,Multi-family,Office and Commercial at
Cantrell and Black Roads near the center of the study area to accommodate
proposed development.
The study area consists of three nodes shown as Commercial along CantrellRoadlocatedattheintersectionsofCantrellRoadwithTaylorLoopRoad,Candlewood Drive,and Southridge Drive/Pleasant Ridge Road.Two areas are
shown as Multi-family located on Pleasant Ridge Road and west of Sam Peck
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
Road.Two small areas of Low Density Residential are shown on the south side
of Cantrell Road at the southeast corners of Russ and Black Streets.An isolated
area east of Pinnacle Valley Road north of the end of Pine Mountain Drive is
shown as Low Density Residential.Suburban Office is shown along Summit
Road southeast of the Rodney Parham/Cantrell intersection.Pankey is shown
primarily as Single Family on the Plan and the majority of the remainder of
property fronting onto Cantrell is shown as Transition.The majority of the land
not shown as Transition on the Future Land Use plan in the surrounding areas is
shown as Single Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Cantrell Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Principal Arterial and is
built to a 5-lane width with curb and gutter installed.Pinnacle Valley and Taylor
Loop Roads are shown on the Master Street Plan as Minor Arterials and built as
rural two-lane roads.Any developments on Pinnacle Valley and Taylor Loop
Roads would require half street improvements to improve these routes to Master
Street Plan standards.Southridge Drive,Pleasant Ridge Road,Sam Peck
Road,and Black Street are all shown on the Master Street Plan as Collector
Streets.Southridge Drive and Pleasant Ridge Road are built to the Master
Street Plan standards for Collector Streets.Sam Peck Road,and Black Street
both require improvements to conform to the Master Street Plan.The only
Bikeway shown in the study area is a Class III bikeway on Pinnacle Valley Road
from State Highway 300 to Cantrell Road.Any development on Pinnacle Valley
Road would need to accommodate the Class III bikeway.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows three parks
within the study area.River Mountain Park is located between Rivercrest and
Southridge Drive in the valley.River Mountain Park is shown as an undeveloped
Large Urban Park of 378.0+acres of natural open space intended to serve a
large area of the city.Large Urban Parks generally consist of large open naturalspaceswithminimaldevelopmentirienvironmentallysensitiveareas.Pankey
Park located at Russ and Piggee Streets is shown as a Neighborhood Park
consisting of 5.0+acres developed to serve the needs of the surrounding
neighborhood.Neighborhood Parks usually consist of a large open area and
provide playground facilities.Taylor Loop Park is shown as an Undeveloped
Community Park of 35.0+acres intended to serve the needs of the surrounding
neighborhoods.Community Parks provide a mixture of active and passiverecreationalfacilities.River Mountain Park and Taylor Loop Park would require
development to conform to their respective classifications within the Parks andRecreationMasterPlan.Pankey Park does not require further development inordertoconformtotheplan.
6
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
These amendments are located in an area covered by the River Mountain
Neighborhood Action plan.This plan is currently under revision.These
amendments are the result of the recommended changes to that plan.
ANALYSIS:
The change for area ¹14,Transition to Park/Open Space,recognizes the
existing floodway of Ison Creek,would enhance the protection of the natural
environment of the area,and expand the buffer between the houses located on
Westbury Drive and property fronting Cantrell Road.
The change located on the north side of Cantrell just west of the Taylor Loop
intersection,area ¹5 Transition to Commercial,would recognize an existing PCD
(Walgreen's)and C-3 zoning located in the commercial node at Cantrell and
Taylor Loop.
Two changes are intended to reduce the density allowable for residential
development.The first area,¹17,located north of the end of Pine Mountain
Road calling for a change from Low'Density Residential to Single Family to
recognize a five-acre single family development.This would recognize existing
zoning and use.The next area ¹26,located on Cantrell Road across the street
from the Pleasant Ridge apartments,would result in a change from Multi-family
to Single Family to recognize existing R-2 zoning.The land had been zoned
PRD but was revoked on July 7,1998 due to the expiration of the time extension
for the development of the property.
The two changes for Transition to Low Density Residential,changes ¹4 and ¹18,
will expand the amount of land available for residential development at increased
density.Change ¹4,located on the north side of Cantrell at Taylor Loop,would
create a buffer between the area to the north shown as Single Family,and the
commercial node located at the intersection.Change ¹18,located on the south
side of Cantrell along Crockett Street,will allow for more residential development
to take place at higher densities and increase the opportunity for a greater
variety of housing types in the neighborhood.
Area ¹21,located on the north side of Cantrell at Sam Peck,and area ¹25,located on the south side of Cantrell west of the Pleasant Ridge apartments,
would recognize the churches at those locations by changing the land use
7
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
categories for these sites from Transition to Public Institutional.These changes
would recognize existing use and zoning.
The changes of Transition to Office for areas ¹20,¹23,¹27,and ¹28,would
recognize existing zonings and land uses.About half of the land area in area¹20,located next to the Grace Community Church,is already built out with an
office development.The change located in area ¹23 on the south side of
Cantrell east of Sam Peck,would recognize existing uses and zoning at this
location.Areas ¹27 and ¹28,located at the intersection of Cantrell and
Southridge Drive,is also largely built out with office developments.The change
in this area would recognize new developments at this location.The change
would also recognize existing use and zoning.
All of the land use changes of Transition to Single Family located in study areas¹2,¹8,¹13,and ¹24,recognize existing land uses and expand areas shown as
Single Family in platted subdivisions.Westchester Court is part of a platted
subdivision and is shown as area ¹2.These homes are fairly new,back up to
Cantrell Road,and there is no room for additional development along Cantrell to
the rear of these houses.This would recognize existing use and zoning.The
change for area ¹8 on Jerry Drive is inside a platted subdivision.This change
would recognize the existing pattern of residential lots that front Jerry Drive and
abuts the non-residential development on Cantrell Road.This would recognize
existing use and zoning.Westbury and Westchase Drive are part of a platted
subdivision and are shown as area ¹13 and would recognize existing
development patterns and zoning.The change to Single Family located at area¹24,south of Cantrell Road north of Piedmont Lane is platted property in a
subdivision and is accessed from Piedmont Lane and is physically separated
from Cantrell Road by the property to the north.This would recognize existinguseandzoning.
The changes of Transition to Single Family for areas ¹11 and ¹12 expand areas
shown as Single Family but contain large tracts of vacant land.The change atarea¹11 covers a parcel of land that is physically separated from Pinnacle
Valley Road by Ison Creek and Cantrell Road from the developed properties tothesouth.The change for area ¹12 would both recognize existing single family
development on Pine Mountain Roa'd and buffer the existing development from
non-residential uses by expanding the area shown as Single Family.This would
recognize existing use and zoning for homes fronting on Pine Mountain Drive.
The changes located at areas ¹1 and ¹9 would result in a land use changes from
Transition to Suburban Office.The change at area ¹1 would recognize existingconditionsalongthenorthsideofCantrellRoadformostofthedistancebetween
Rummel Road and the commercial node at the Taylor Loop intersection wherethepropertyfrontsCantrellRoadandfurtherresidentialdevelopmentisunlikelytotakeplace.The change at area ¹9 would recognize existing conditions
8
January 9,2u03
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Cantrell Road and Jerry
Drive where new residential uses are unlikely to develop in the future.
The changes located at areas ¹3,¹6,¹7,¹10,¹15,¹16,¹19,and ¹22,would
result in a land use change from Transition to Suburban Office.The change for
area ¹3 covers property fronting Cantrell Road west of the Harvest Foods
location.This change would provide a buffer for Single Family development on
Westchester Court from the non-residential development to the northeast.The
change at area ¹6 on the west side of Taylor Loop Road would recognize
existing conditions.Half of the lots are zoned for non-residential uses,and the
other half are zoned R-2 Single Family.The change at area ¹7 on the east side
of Taylor Loop Road would provide for land for non-residential development to
take place in an area where the property fronts Taylor Loop Road and buffer the
residential uses to the east from the intense uses to the west.The change at
area ¹10 on the north side of Cantrell Road at the intersection of Jerry Drive
would recognize an existing business located on land that is part of the
Cantrell/Taylor Loop commercial node and is unlikely to be developed for
residential uses.Area ¹15 is a small piece of land located between Cantrell
Road and Ison Creek that fronts Cantrell Road is unlikely to be further developed
for residential uses in the future.The change at area ¹16 includes property that
fronts Cantrell Road between the Kroger development and Pine Mountain Drive.
The change for area ¹19 located along the south side of Cantrell from Crockett
Street to Sam Peck Road would allow the future development of this property to
a suburban office type of development on the west side of Sam Peck Road from
the Office development located across the street in the Grace Community
Church Addition.The change for area ¹22 on the north side of Cantrell east ofSamPeckwouldexpandtheexistingareafrontingCantrellRoadattheGrace
Community Church available for non-residential.The change would reduce land
available for residential uses in the vicinity of the Cantrell/Sam Peck intersection.
All of the areas shown as Transition are characterized by low densities of
development with the majority of the land in these areas zoned either for office
uses through the Planned Zoning Development process or R-2.In the
amendment areas under review,the few areas zoned for commercial uses are
small businesses.The two areas zoned for multi-family uses consist of a churchatonelocationandvacantlandattheotherlocations.The non-residential useswerezonedusingthePlannedZoningDevelopmentprocess,a requirement for
non-residential uses located in areas shown as Transition.Most of the PZD
zoned areas are uses compatible with the Suburban Office category.These
changes are intended to reflect existing conditions within the study area.Any
development within these areas would need to conform to the design standards
of the Highway 10 DOD.For most of the area,the category of Suburban Office
would protect the scenic value of the Highway 10 DOD through the requirement
9
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
of PZD's.The proposed changes to Low Density Residential,Single Family,
Park/Open Space and Public Institutional reflect existing conditions and provide
for less intense development in the Highway 10 corridor.
Area ¹29 has been removed from the amendment.After checking the survey
for the PCD to the northeast,it was discovered that the amendment area was
non-existent.The original intent of the change was to amend the classification
on land south of the PCD to remove future Commercial along Fairview Road.
The PCD line is actually on the southern border of the amendment area,
therefore the amendment in this area is not necessary.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Pleasant Valley
Property Owners Association,River Valley Property Owners Association,Pankey
Community Improvement Association,Piedmont Neighborhood Association,
Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association,Secluded Hills Property Owners
Association,Walton Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association,Westbury
Neighborhood Association,and Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners
Association.Staff has received 34 comments from area residents.14 are in
support,4 are opposed to the change and 16 were neutral.Pleasant Forest
Neighborhood Association,which is'south of areas ¹18 -¹29,supports the
changes.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes some of the changes are appropriate and some are not.
Staff recommends the changes for areas ¹1,¹2,¹5,¹8,¹9,¹11,¹12,¹13,¹14,¹17,¹18,¹20,¹21,¹23,¹24,¹25,¹27,¹28,and ¹29.These changes would
recognize existing conditions and encourage new non-residential developments
to conform to the requirements of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District.
Staff does not recommend the changes for areas ¹3,¹4,¹6,¹7,¹10,¹15,¹16,¹19,¹22,and ¹26.Although the category of Suburban Office would allow non-
residential development in conformance to the requirements of the Highway 10
Design Overlay District,the possibility of future residential developments at
increased densities would be eliminated.The land shown as Transition in area¹4 already allows the property to be developed for residential uses at greater
densities as long as the development either conforms to the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District or is developed through the PZD process.The change to
10
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
Commercial for area ¹5 would allow non-residential development to take place
without the requirement for a PZD intended to protect the integrity of the
Highway 10 Design Overlay District.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the commission.
Planning Commission Chair Obray Nunnley recommended that the presentation
and discussion of this item be divided to give the Planning Commission the
opportunity to discuss the amendments separately so a separate vote could be
taken for each of the areas.It was agreed that the proposed changes to the
Future Land Use Plan supported by city staff and property owners would be
grouped together for one vote,while the controversial proposals would be voted
on separately.
Before proceeding further with the discussion,Commissioner Nunnley requested
that the individuals opposed to changes introduce themselves to the Planning
Commission.Mr.Tom Cole presented himself in opposition to the changes
recommended for Areas 4,5,and 10.Mr.Keith Wingfield introduced himself in
opposition to the proposed changes for Areas 11,and 12.Mr.Harrigan
Wordsmith introduced himself to address the recommended change for Area 23.
Mr.Tom Cole,representing David J.Jones &Co.,spoke in opposition to the
changes recommended for Areas 4,5,and 10.Mr.Cole stated that he learned
about the proposed Land Use Plan amendment from Commissioner Rector.Mr.
Cole also found out about the review of the River Mountain Neighborhood Action
Plan from Commissioner Rector.Mr.Cole stated that property owners were not
notified of the plan review or the proposed plan amendments.Mr.Cole stated
that property owners as well as residents were stakeholders in the areas being
discussed for this item.Mr.Jim Lawson,Secretary to the Planning Commission,
stated that not everyone who was invited to participate in the review process
attended the meetings.Brian Minyard,City Staff,stated that staff relies on the
ownership records at the Pulaski County Tax Assessors Office to obtain the
names and addresses of property owners for notification purposes.
Commissioner Rector stated that he would recuse on Areas 4 and 5.
Commissioner Norm Floyd asked Mr.Cole if there was a better way to research
property ownership.Mr.Cole stated extra steps should be taken to notify
property owners without specifying what those steps were.
11
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
Commissioner Floyd asked Mr.Cole if he owned property in the areas under
discussion.Mr.Cole stated that he had an interest in some property located in
the areas under discussion.
Commissioner Bob Lowry asked if the Board of Directors determines the process
for notifying property owners.Stephen Giles,City Attorneys Office,stated that
the Board of Directors has the authority to make changes to the notification
process.
A motion was made to approve the changes as recommended by staff for Areas
1-9,13,15-22,24-27,and 29.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0
noes,and 1 absent.Commissioner Rector recused on Areas 4 and 5.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation of the proposed change for
Area 10.
Commissioner Judith Faust stated that the staff report recommended against the
proposed change from Transition to Suburban Office.A motion was made to
deny the change as recommended by staff for Area 10.The motion passed with
a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation of the proposed change for
Area 11.
Planning Commission Chair,Obray Nunnley asked if there should be a buffer
between an area shown as Single Family and areas designated for non-
residential uses.Brian Minyard,City Staff,stated that in this case the residential
area would be accessed without driving through a non-residential area.
Mr.Keith Wingfield,representing the property owners in Areas 11 and 12,spoke
in opposition to the recommended changes.Mr.Wingfield stated that the
current Transition future land use category shown provides for an orderly changebetweenresidentialandnon-residential uses.Mr.Wingfield was opposed to
designating areas as Single Family next to non-residential areas and added that
Single Family developments would not take place next to those areas.The
Transition category would allow higher density residential uses to develop andserveasabufferbetweenSingleFamilyandnon-residential uses.
Commissioner Faust asked what was located on the side of the road oppositefromArea11.Mr.Wingfield stated a house.
Commissioner Floyd asked if Areas 11 and 12 should remain classified asTransitionontheFutureLandUsePlan.Mr.Wingfield replied in the affirmativeandthenaskedifaPlannedZoningDevelopmentwasalwaysrequiredinan
12
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
area shown as transition.Mr.Lawson stated that a Planned Zoning District was
required unless an application conforms to Design Overlay Standards.In this
case,the areas shown as Transition on the Future Land Use Plan coincide with
the area covered by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District.
A motion was made to deny the change as recommended by staff for Area 11.
The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.
Mr.Mr.Wingfield spoke in opposition to the proposed change in land use from
Transition to Single Family in Area 12 along Pinnacle Valley Road.Mr.Wingfield
stated that the property in Area 12 was near a commercial node and that the
owners wanted the property to remain classified as Transition.
Planning Commission Chair,Obray Nunnley asked staff if Pinnacle Valley Road
was a minor arterial.Mike Hood,City Staff,stated that not only was Pinnacle
Valley Road classified as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan,but that the
Public Works Department wanted to widen the road and reduce the number of
curves.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area12.The motion failed with a vote of 5 ayes,5 noes,and 1 absent.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation on Area 14.Mr.Minyard
stated that the property in this area was isolated from neighboring properties.
Planning Commission Chair,Obray Nunnley noted that the opposition to the
proposed change to Park/Open Space in Area 14 was not present.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area14.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation on Area 23.Mr.Minyard
stated that the existing building on this property had an existing office
component.
Commissioner Norm Floyd asked why the land use category couldn't be changedtoMixedOfficeCommercialinsteadofSuburbanOfficesincethepropertyin
question was zoned as a Planned Office Development.Brian Minyard,CityStaff,stated that this recommendation was based on suggestions made by the
Review Steering Committee for the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan.
Mr.Harrigan Wortsmith spoke in opposition to the change proposed for Area 23andstatedthattheTransitionFutureLandUsecategoryworkedwellforthis
property.
13
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
Commissioner Bill Rector stated that the change to Suburban Office would
merely eliminate the potential for residential uses on the property.Jim Lawson,
City Staff,stated that the Suburban Office category would limit future office
development to one-story office buildings.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area
23.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation on Area 28.Mr.Minyard
stated a homeowner located in that area opposed the recommended change for
Area 28.
Planning Commission Chair,Obray Nunnley noted that the opposition to the
proposed change to Office in Area 28 was not present.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area
28.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.
V~IS
A motion was made to accept the recommendations by staff for Areas 1-9,13,15-22,24-27,and 29.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1
absent.Commissioner Rector recused on areas 4 and 5.This vote resulted in a
recommendation from the Planning Commission to change the Land Use
categories where Staff recommended approval and deny the change where Staff
recommended denial for Areas 1-9,13,15-22,24-27,and 29.For the
description and location of those changes see the Proposal /Request section of
the Staff Report.For the list of recommendations see the Staff
Recommendation section of the Staff Report.
A motion was made to deny the change as recommended by staff for Area 10.
The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.The issue for
Area 10 was a change from Transition to Suburban Office,on the north side of
Cantrell west of Pinnacle Valley Road,includes property developed with a
restaurant and houses.This vote resulted in a recommendation from the
Planning Commission to preserve Area 10 as Transition on the Future Land Use
Plan.
A motion was made to deny the change as recommended by staff for Area 11.
The motion passed with a vote of 10 yes,0 noes,and 1 absent.The issue for
Area 11 was a change from Transition to Single Family,on the west side of
14
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:14 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-01-01
Pinnacle Valley Road north of Cantrell,which is comprised of large lot residential
and vacant land.This vote resulted in a recommendation from the Planning
Commission to preserve Area 11 as Transition on the Future Land Use Plan.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area
12.The motion failed with a vote of 5 ayes,5 noes,and 1 absent.The issue for
Area 12 was a change from Transition to Single Family,along Pine Mountain
Road,comprised of the houses located on Pine Mountain Road and vacant land
located on the east side of Pinnacle Valley Road.This vote resulted in a
recommendation from the Planning Commission to preserve Area 12 as
Transition on the Future Land Use Plan.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area
14.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.The issue
for Area 14 was a change from Transition to Park/Open Space,on Cantrell at
Ison Creek,which contains vacant land in the floodway of Ison Creek.This vote
resulted in a recommendation from the Planning Commission to change Area 14
to Park/Open Space on the Future Land Use Plan.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area23.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.The issue
for Area 23 was a change from Transition to Office,on the south side of Cantrell
east of Sam Peck,containing land developed for office uses.This vote resulted
in a recommendation from the Planning Commission to change Area 23 to Office
on the Future Land Use Plan.
A motion was made to approve the change as recommended by staff for Area
28.The motion passed with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,and 1 absent.The issue
for Area 28 was a change from Transition to Office,on the north side of CantrelleastofSouthridgeDrive,consisting of land occupied by office uses.This vote
resulted in a recommendation from the Planning Commission to change Area 28
to Office on the Future Land Use Plan.
15
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:15 MIDTOWN UPDATE
Name:Midtown District and Design concepts
Location:I-630 to Lee Ave.,McKinley to University
~Re uest:Approve a Redevelopment District area and Design Concepts for the area
Source:Midtown Task Force
PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
To approve the boundaries for a redevelopment district in the Markham/University area
and agree with the general design concepts to be used in the area.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The area between I-630 and B Street from University to McKinley is generally zoned'C3',General Commercial.This area is currently commercial in use.There are two
mails,a hospital and various commercial uses in the area.To the north between B
Street and Tirbou's Way the area is generally zoned '03',General Office.The existing
use pattern is an office tower with several other office uses and a couple of multifamily
developments located within this area.
Along the east side of University,north of Markham there are a mix of zoning
classifications.Some of the area is zoned 'R3',Single Family,some is classified '03',
General Office and some 'R5',Urban Residential with a small area of 'C3',General
Commercial.The use pattern is predominately single family with some office,and
multifamily use.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
The Master Street Plan shows both University Avenue and Markham as Arterials.Each
road should be four or more lanes and carry vehicles around and through the City.
McKinley and Lee Avenue/Tirbou's Way are Collectors,which should be designed to be
two or three lane roads.These roads should be built to carry people and goods to the
arterial system.
PARKS:
War Memorial Park and Golf Course is located to the southeast of the proposed districtatMarkham/University Avenue.The Park System Master Plan calls for open space or
park land to be within eight blocks of any development.With the use of open space or
recreational areas at Churches,private schools,and public schools all areas within the
proposed district should be within the eight blocks recommended by the Plan.Future
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:15 Cont.MIDTOWN UPDATE
developments should consider including open space/recreation within them in keeping
with the Plan's —City within a Park concept.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS;
There are no historic districts in the area of this proposed district.However there is a
National Register District,which overlaps a small portion of the district along Markham
to the extreme east.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is located in an area covered by three different City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plans —Briarwood,Hillcrest and Midtown.The
Briarwood Plan does not address the redevelopment of the University corridor.
However the Plan does want to keep the neighborhoods character intact,so any
redevelopment should be such that the adjacent neighborhood's character is not
adversely affected.The Midtown Plan specifically recommends allowing the
development pattern suggested in the ULI-Midtown report to occur.The Hillcrest Plan
makes several comments,which should be considered with any redevelopment.They
want no net loss of residential units;to encourage and improve the walkability of the
neighborhood;to locate intensive uses around the neighborhood edge or current
neighborhood commercial area;to encourage quality infill building of a similar scale.
ANALYSIS:
At the request of residents for the Hillcrest area and concerns of the City about the
current situation in the Markham-University area,the City arranged for the Urban Land
Institute to complete a design and redevelopment plan for the area.In April 2001 a
team of expertise arrived in Little Rock and began work.Both the Little Rock Planning
Commission and Board of Directors have reviewed the Plan that was produced.
A group of interested citizens,with City representation,formed in the summer of 2002.
This group's goal has been to work toward the implementation of the ULI-Midtown
report.The group membership included representatives of surrounding neighborhoods,
development interests,owners,the school district and the City.This group has been
reviewing financing,organization,design and formation of the district.The MidtownTaskForcebelievesthenextstepistoformaDistrictbysettingboundaries.A Plan fortheareawillthenbedevelopedandfinallytheDistrictcanusevariousfunding
mechanisms to implement the Plan.The Task Force has developed a proposed districtanddesignconceptforconsideration.
The Task Force believes that this is only the first step of the process.Once the Districtisformed,a Plan is developed for the District.This Plan will be brought before the
Planning Commission and Board of Directors for approval.Once the Plan is approved,redevelopment activities within the District can begin.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:15 Cont.MIDTOWN UPDATE
The Task Force is recommending that the redevelopment district include both the
primary and secondary areas of the ULI-Midtown report.This area is:1)between
University Avenue and McKinley from l-630 to Tirbou's Way;2)north of Markham to
Lee Avenue and from University to Pierce;3)north of Lee Avenue to Evergreen and
from University Avenue to Buchanan;4)east of Pierce to Pine,between Markham and
A Street.
A draft ordinance for setting the district boundaries is included for review.This
boundary is based on that used by the ULI Midtown Report.Finally there is a set of
drawings to illustrate the design concepts recommended.These concepts are based
on the recommendations in the ULI Midtown Report.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Evergreen,Hillcrest,
University Park,and Briarwood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
In early December,Staff received a request to defer this item to January 23,2003.
Staff recommends deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The item was placed on Consent Agenda at defer to January 23,2003.By a vote of10forand0against,the item was deferred.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:16 FILE NO.:MSP03-01
Name:Master Street Plan Amendment —l-30,East LR 8 Port Planning Districts
Location:Generally north and west of the airport to l-30
Receuest:Reclassify several Collectors,Arterials and Local Streets
Source:City of Little Rock
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Master Street Plan amendment in the l-30,East LR and Port Planning Districts
modifying the Collector and Arterial network.The Arterials are to provide access
through and around the City and Area,with a secondary function of access to adjacent
property.Collectors are to provide access to and from the arterial network to a
development,subdivision or large center of activity,as well as access to adjacent
properties.
CURRENT MASTER STREET PLAN:
In the area of change,north and west of the airport to l-30,from west to east the current
Plan shows Second Street as a Collector (from I-30 to its terminus).Fourth Street is
shown as a Collector from l-30 to Byrd.Sixth/Picron/10'Airport (Temple)is shown asaCollectorfroml-30 to the airport.Ninth Street is shown as a Collector from l-30 to
Bond Street.15'Fletcher/17th Street is classified as a Collector from College to Bond.Barber is shown as a Collector from Confederate Boulevard to l-630.Bond is shown asaCollectorfrom17'treet to 2"Street.
Bond is shown,as a Principal Arterial from Roosevelt Road to 17'treet and Frazier
Pike is a Principal Arterial from Roosevelt Road to l-440.
None of the Arterials are built to standard.The Collectors are built to standard except
for a portion of 15'Fletcher/17 Street and a portion of Bond.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
There is no City recognized Neighborhood Plan in the amendment area.
ANALYSIS:
The development occurring in the area together with the Land Use Plan changes
(accompanying item),necessitate a review of the City Master Street Plan north and
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:16 Cont.FILE NO.:MSP03-01
west of Little Rock National Airport.The changes will be reviewed as follows,east-west
roads first from north to south.Second Street from I-30 to eastern Terminus from a
Collector to Local (unclassified).A portion of this road goes through the New
Presidential Park and has been closed by the City.
Third Street/6'"Street/Airport (Temple)is to be classified as a Minor Arterial.This
would replace both the 6'treet and 2"Street connections from east Little Rock to
downtown.The first segment,3'treet,from Cumberland to McLean (eastern
Terminus)is classified as a Collector west of I-30 and is not classified (Local)east of I-
30.Since this road would provide the connection to downtown the function changes,
no longer just connecting an area to the arterial network.With the closing of 2"Street
and the new developments of the Presidential Library and Heifer International
Headquarters complex,a new road from Third Street east around these developments
is proposed.This new alignment would connect 3'treet to 6 Street,providing
access to developments and subdivisions further to the east.From approximately
Pepper to Picron,a segment of 6'"Street would continue this east-west arterial.This is
a change in classification for the segment from Collector to Minor Arterial.Based on
the proposed Land Use Plan,new industrial developments would be south of the road
with recreational uses north of the alignment.This use pattern would continue as the
alignment leaves 6'"street and follows the levee to Airport Road (Temple).Airport
Road would take the road around the runway and into the airport terminal from the
north.The design standard for this east-west arterial is reduced from the typical arterial
standard.For this road a 70 foot right-of-way would be used with 48 feet of paving
(back to back).Sidewalks would be required on both sides at a six-foot width and a
five-foot utility access would be located on each side of the road.
Fourth Street from l-30 to McLean would be changed from Collector to Unclassified
(Local).With the change in 3'treet,Fourth Street would no longer need to functionasaCollector.One should note that the Land Use Plan development pattern would
result in a local commercial street for this segment.Thus the design standards wouldbesimilartothecurrentstandardsthoughthefunctionofmovingtraffictothearterial
system might not be the major function as before.
A segment of 6'treet (College to Pepper)would be changed from Collector to
Unclassified (Local).This is largely for the same reason as stated above and with the
land uses along the street the design standards would be similar to the current
standards even though the function changes from collector to local.
The Picron/10'"Street Collector is proposed to change to Unclassified (Local).With thechangeinlanduseproposedintheLandUsePlanitem,the circulation pattern between
Townsend and Carson should change significantly.These roads could cease to exist.The new alignment along the levee replaces the function and any road (due to the land
use)built in the area would have to meet similar design standards though functioningforlocaltraffic.
2
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:16 Cont.FILE NO.:MSP03-01
Seventeenth Street from Barber to College is proposed to change from Local to
Collector.This change is designed to work with the College Street upgrade redesigning
the Collector connections in and around Hanger Hill.
The North-South road alignments with classification changes are as follows.Barber
from 17'"Street to l-630 is changed to Unclassified from Collector.This connection
would be replaced by the 17'College connection and service a similar need.College
and College extension from 17'"Street to 3 Street extension is proposed to change
from Unclassified (Local)to Collector.This alignment would service two functions,one
to get Hanger Hill area residents to the 3'treet Arterial.The second is to provide the
developments (Presidential Library and Heifer International Headquarters)with access
to the freeway.The standard would include sidewalks on both sides of the road rather
than just one as with the typical standard.
Bond Street from 6'treet to Roosevelt Road would be classified to Minor Arterial.The
segment north of 17'treet is currently classified as Collector and the segment south
of 17'"Street is classified as Principal Arterial.The design standard for Bond is
recommended to be a 60-foot right-of-way with 48 feet of paving (back to back).Two
traveling lanes and two bike/parking lanes,sidewalks and utility strip would be required
on both sides of the road.With the new 3rd/6 /Airport (Temple)Minor Arterial and
Roosevelt Road Minor Arterial,this segment of Bond provides a part of the arterial
network.The southern leg of Bond had been a portion of an I-630/l-440 connection.
This connection has been removed from the regional transportation plan and partially
removed from the City's Master Street Plan.The segment of Frazier Pike from
Roosevelt Road to l-440 is the last part of this former alignment.Without the
connection to the two freeways,Frazier Pike would function as an Arterial from
Roosevelt Road south and east into College Station,through the port industrial parkareaandontoWrightsville.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:East Little Rock,Hanger
Hill,East Roosevelt and Community Outreach.These associations,property owners
and residents were notified of meetings in early November 2002 to discuss this issue
along with Land Use Plan changes.Approximately 130 households and businesses
responded.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:16 Cont.FILE NO.:MSP03-01
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
The item was placed on Consent Agenda for approval.By a vote of 10 for and
0 against,the item was approved.
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:17 FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —1-30,East LR and Port
Planning Districts
Location:Bounded by Arkansas River,I-30 and Fourche Creek
~Reuest:Single Family,Low Density Residential,Multifamily,
Public/Institutional,Park/Open Space,Commercial,Light
Industrial,Industrial,Mixed Use and Mixed Commercial Industrial
TO Low Density Residential,Public Institutional,Park/Open
Space,Commercial,Light Industrial,Industrial,Service Trades
District and Mixed Use Urban
Source:City of Little Rock
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the l-30,East Little Rock,and Port Planning
Districts to reflect the proposals of the 'East of l-30 Report'ade by the Mayor in
July 2002.The new use pattern would be 'Public'or the airport infrastructure,
surrounded by Light Industrial for 'airport related'r other industrial uses.Mixed
Use Urban is expanded to the east from McLean to Bond,for urban pedestrian-
oriented mixed-use developments.The Hanger Hill and East Little Rock
Neighborhoods are encouraged to be come a more dense residential
development with Low Density Residential.Finally office and support industrialusesareencouragedwiththeServiceTradesDistrictatRooseveltRoadandl-30.(Map M)
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
A review of the existing zoning and land use pattern will be presented from east
to west within the area of the amendment.Between (east of)the airport and
Fourche Creek there is a large area of 'R2',Single Family,which is generally
used as single family.The homes along Fourche Dam Pike generally date to
pre-annexation and many have a rural feel.Along Roosevelt Road a row of
single-family homes is in a more urban subdivision style.Between these two
residential neighborhoods,there is an industrial development,zoned 'l1',
Industrial Park.
As one proceeds west,the airport is mostly zoned 'l2',Light Industrial.To the
airport's south is an area of 'l2'nd '.C4',Open Display Commercial.The uses in
this area are predominately airport related —car rental companies,hotel,parking
facilities,etc.North of the airport is an area predominately 'R3',Single Family
with small areas (a few lots)zoned commercial (C3,General Commercial).Theusepatternissimilartothezoning,single-family homes with a scattering of small
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
businesses and churches.There is also a larger 'public homes'ultifamily
development in this area.This complex is zoned Single Family (R3)and is made
up of one-story structures,which could be considered attached single family.
Southwest of the airport along Roosevelt Road one first comes upon a small
'industrial park'ype development of warehouse distribution type uses.The area
is zoned 'l2'.North of Roosevelt Road there are several cemeteries zoned 'R2'.
There is a commercial shopping center at the northwest corner of Confederate
Boulevard and Roosevelt Road,which is zoned 'C3'.The middle school west of
the shopping center is zoned 'R4',duplex.
Directly west of the airport is an area used and zoned for industrial.A small area
(one by five blocks)is zoned 'R3'nd is homes,but totally surrounded by
Industrial use and zoning (l2 and l3,Heavy Industrial).To the north of this
neighborhood is a larger industrial area zoned 'l3'.The Hanger Hill
neighborhood is further to the west along l-30 and is an eight by three or so
block single family and duplex area zoned 'R4'.
To the northwest of the airport is first a small single-family area (3 by 3 blocks)of
homes zoned 'R3'.Two large industrial zoned (l3)businesses (one vacant)are
north and west of the residential area.A second small single-family area (3 by 3
blocks)zoned 'R4's along the river as one proceeds in a northwest direction.
West of this area is an industrial use area,zoned 'l3'.While adjacent to l-30,
one finds the Presidential Park zoned 'PR',Park and Recreation,and a small
area (3 by 3 blocks)of 'UU',Urban Use,which is currently vacant and small
industrial uses.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
July 17,2001 —Several City owned properties were changed to Park/Open
Space.Three of these were within or very near the amendment area.The first
was from Low Density Residential at 8'nd Rock.The second was at Richlane
and Heather from Single Family.The third was at the north end of Beauregard
and Longstreet Drives.AII three are City Park and Recreation Department
owned property.
March 7,2000 —The City modified the Land Use Plan for downtown as a result
of a special study.Mixed Use Urban (MXU)was introduced.Most of downtown
was changed to 'MXU'rom Office,Commercial,Mixed Office Commercial,and
Multifamily.Areas east of I-30 and north of 9 Street were changed from
Industrial to'MXU'.An area between6'nd 9'treets,westof College was
changed from Transition to Low Density Residential.
April 20,1999 —The area south of Roosevelt,between l-30 and Confederate
was changed from Industrial to Light Industrial on the west and to Mixed Use ontheeast.Two areas were changed from Mixed Commercial Industrial to
Commercial.One was the northwest corner of Confederate Boulevard and
2
January 9,2U03
ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
Roosevelt Road the other was the northeast corner of I-30 and Roosevelt Road.
This was to more accurately reflect the existing and probable future land use
pattern for the area.
September 1,1998,an area was changed from Single Family to Industrial,
between 16'nd 17 Streets and Boyce and Fletcher Streets.This was as a
result of a request to reclassify the property for redevelopment.
The Land Use Plan for the area under amendment is as follows (from east to
west).There are two Single Family areas east of the airport,divided by an area
shown for industrial.Proceeding west,a large area of industrial use is shown for
the airport and surrounding industrial businesses.This industrial use continues
west to the old Rock Island rail tracks.
Near the airport there are a couple of other uses shown.South of the airport is
an area of Mixed Commercial Industrial and north of the airport is an area of
Single Family with numerous Public Institutional use areas shown throughout the
single-family area.In addition,several multifamily use areas are shown in this
residential neighborhood.One is a Public Housing development,the others are
small areas used as transition from the Industrial further to the west.
Along the western boundary of the amendment area,starting in the south,is a
Light Industrial use area with a strip of Commercial use shown along its north.A
large area of Public Institutional use is shown for several schools and
cemeteries.A Single Family use area is shown to the north,with Commercial
and Low Density Residential use transitioning to Mixed Use Urban.Along the
River and Fourche Creek are Park Open Space areas.(Map L)
MASTER STREET PLAN:
There is a Master Street Plan Amendment accompanying this amendment.The
proposal is to have reduced design standards for some of the arterials through
and in the area.See accompanying Master Street Plan Amendment for
additional information.
PARKS:
There are four existing City parks within the amendment area.In addition there
are several parks adjacent or close to the amendment area.The Parks and
Recreation Master Plan recommends:an open space —park along the Arkansas
River through this area (the River Trail),an open space —park along Fourche
Creek through this area (the Earth Trail);an open space —park connections
between the two trails in the western section of the amendment area;and that in
all cases a park —open space area be within eight blocks of an development.
The Plan's basis is the City as a Park or "A City in a Park".However to achieve
the Parks and Recreation Master Plan's 8 block goal will require some
partnerships with others such as schools and churches.
3
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
This amendment package is the next step in a process started by the Mayor'
report to the Board on the area east of l-30.In the "East of l-30"report
significant changes in use were proposed.These changes were based on
changing conditions in and around the area.Input and guidance was obtained
from representatives of some of the neighborhoods within the area.This report
was made to the Board of Directors in July of 2002 after several months of work
by City Staff.After that meeting the implementation steps call for the City'
Plans to be modified to allow the plan's proposals to occur.A package of
changes was developed and presented at two meetings within the area.Both
property owners and residents were invited to these meeting.Over 2800 notices
were sent to invite individuals to two meetings in early November 2002.
Approximately a hundred thirty households and properties have made contact
with the City about the proposed changes.
The area under amendment is one where change has begun from two distinct
sources.In the eastern section of the amendment area,Little Rock National
Airport has been a source of change.The airport has continued to grow and
make improvements over the last couple of decades.Much of the recent growthhasbeenforrunwayextensionsandsafetyimprovements.The airport has
developed a long term as well as short and midterm plans for the facility and
surrounding area.
The City believes that the Land Use Plan should recognize the long-term plan of
the airport.To this end,significant changes are proposed to the City Land Use
Plan.The first (Map A)is to recognize the actual infrastructure of the airport
(runways,taxiways,terminal,etc)as Public Institutional rather than Industrial on
the Plan.This should provide a more accurate understanding of the actual useoftheland.
The other change in this area is to recognize the long-term plan (20 plus year)that the areas surrounding the airport be industrial in nature.This involves fourareas.The area east of the airport (Map B)is shown as Industrial and Single
Family currently.With the airport's plans to build an eastern taxiway along theeastrunway,this area becomes more attractive for airport related industrial uses,
4
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
which might take direct access to the new taxiway.(This could be a good
location for the freight related uses at the airport.)The recommendation is for
Light Industrial use.(Note:This is an area where some residents have
indicated opposition to changing the plan.)
The second change is to the south (Map A).It is currently Industrial and the
change proposed is to Light Industrial.It has access to the taxiway system with
one existing industrial use.The third area (Map C)is to the west and northwest
of the airport.The southern portion is shown for Industrial and has industrial and
airport related uses in existence.The northern portion is currently shown for
Single Family use.Though there are homes there now,with the improvements
underway to the adjacent runway and taxiway direct access will become
possible.This makes the area desirable for airport related industrial use.The
recommendation is for Light Industrial for this area.
The fourth change (Map D)is north of the airport.Currently an industrial use
exists in the southern portion of the area,which is shown as Industrial.A larger
area of Single Family and Multifamily is shown north of 10'treet.With the
extensions of the two western runways and accompanying taxiways,this area is
now more desirable for airport related industrial use.The recommendation is for
Light Industrial for this area.
The Security -Boyce area,(Map D)a one block by six block Single Family area,
surrounded by Industrial is proposed to be shown as industrial.This is a small
area of single-family homes,which has experienced some loss of residential
area over the last several years.(NOTE:This is an area where some residents
have indicated opposition to changing the plan.)To the south is an area of
Industrial,the actual use pattern is closer to Light Industrial.The proposal is to
change the area south of 22"Street between Bond and Confederate Boulevard
(Map E)to Light Industrial use.
The second source of change affects the western quarter of the amendment
area.The forces of change are:the growth of downtown,the Presidential Park,
Heifer International Headquarters complex and strengthening of some of the
historic central Little Rock neighborhoods.The major area of change (Map E)is
generally from 9'"street to the Arkansas River and I-30 to Bond Street.In this
area Mixed Use-Urban is proposed to expand east and north.To the east,the
use is currently industrial with an industrial classification.With the new
developments underway,the nature of this area is expected to change from its
historic industrial to more of a mixed pattern with many urban pedestrian
features.To allow this to occur,the plan must be changed.
To the south a Commercial and Low Density Residential area (Map F)is
proposed for this Mixed Use Urban classification.Again the purpose is to allow
more flexibility in use and hopefully encourage a more urban-pedestrian type of
development.
5
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
The Hanger Hill (to the south —Map G)and "East Little Rock"(to the east —Map
H)neighborhoods are both shown as Single Family currently.In both cases the
proposal is for Low Density Residential.This would allow density to increase
from a maximum of 6 units to a maximum of 10 units.This is a minor
densification of the areas.The City would like to see these areas remain
predominately resident but allow for more flexible in housing types (to add
attached,zero-lot line,etc.)(NOTE:In the "East Little Rock"neighborhood there
was some concern about the change).
The Roosevelt Road area,from l-30 to Confederate Boulevard (Map I)in the
southwest corner on the amendment area is proposed for a minor change.
South of Roosevelt the change would be from Light Industrial and Mixed Use to
Service Trades District.This is not a major change since the new use is still
designed to support industrial uses.To the north of Roosevelt Road the area
changes to Service Trades and Public Institutional removing the Commercial and
Single Family currently shown.These two use areas were small (about a city
block each)and the proposed changes indicate the general use pattern for the
area.
The final change is actual a series of changes along the Arkansas River (Maps J
8 K)to Park/Open Space from various uses.This change more accurately
reflects the probable future development along the river.It also reflects the
Parks and Recreation Master Plan —River Trail.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:East Little Rock,
Hanger Hill,East Roosevelt and Community Outreach.These associations,
property owners and residents were notified of meetings in early November 2000
to discuss this issue.Approximately 130 households and businesses
responded.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Upon further review,Staff recommends approval of the new land use
configuration with one change.That change is at l-30 and Roosevelt Road
(Map I).The plan should show some commercial at this location to capture
highway related commercial uses (service stations,food and lodging).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Walter Malone,of Planning Staff,indicated he would review the plan changes bysketchmap.Mr.Malone first reminded the Commission the source of the land
use changes —the East of l-30 Study.The changes are based on two forces:in
6
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:LU03-06-01
the East the Airport Master Plan and in the West the strengthening of
neighborhoods and redevelopment of the Downtown area (Presidential Library,
Heifer International,River Market,etc.).After reviewing areas "A","B","C"and
"D",Planning Director Jim Lawson stated for the record that the proposed
changes were not zoning changes and that the actual use change likely would
not occur for some time.Further no one is planning on purchasing property for
this purpose at this time and anyone currently living in a single family home could
continue to do so for some time to come.Mr.Malone stated this was true for all
the areas in question,the zoning was not changed and the plan change only
changes the way staff will review rezoning requests by property owners in the
area.
Mr.Malone proceeded to review the areas "E","F","G"and "H".For area "I",
Staff is recommending Commercial use rather than the Service Trades District
proposed at the Roosevelt Road/l-30 interchange.Finally,Maps J and K show
changes to Open Space along the River to conform with the Parks Master Plan.
Commissioner Faust questioned the desirability of changing all the
neighborhoods around the airport since there are no immediate plans to act by
the Airport.Commissioner Floyd raised similar concerns and issues.There was
discussion about this and whether deferral to reconsider some or all the areas
should be considered.
Debby Ellis,resident of Fourche Dam Pike area,spoke against changing their
neighborhood.Ms.Ellis indicated this was a stable neighborhood and good
neighbors.Until the airport is ready to acquire the area,please allow these good
citizens to live in this neighborhood in peace.
John Gardner,member of New Hebron Baptist Church,stated that he knew that
there are going to be changes,but he was concerned about the timeframe.
A motion to defer to February 20,2003 was made by vote of 10 for and 0 against,
the item was deferred.
7
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:18 Birchwood-Walnut Valle Nei hborhoods Plan
Name:Birchwood-Walnut Valley Neighborhoods Plan
Location:l-430 to Napa Valley,Rodney Parham to Financial Centre
Receuest:Resolution of Support
Source:Neighborhood Group
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
The Walnut Valley Plan Area is located in west Little Rock and is bounded byl-430 on the East;Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads on the North;Napa Valley
and Bowman Roads (connected by Mara Lynn Road)on the West;and Kanis
Road on the South.The 1990 Census listed the Area's population at 7,218.
The 2000 Census showed the Area to have grown to 8,677 persons,an increase
of 1,459 (approx.20/0).A large majority of this growth (94'/0)can be attributed
to an increase in the Area's minority population.According to the 2000 Census,
the study area contains about 4.74 percent of the total population of the City of
Little Rock.
In October of 2001,4,400 surveys were mailed to the area and 463 were
returned to the Department of Planning and Development by the requested date
of October 30,2001.This represents a 10.5 percent response rate and is
comparable to previous surveys conducted by the Department.As with most
other surveys conducted in association with the neighborhood plan process,a
hundred percent survey was done of the residents.A ten percent response rate
provides a good picture of the needs and desires within the neighborhoods.The
survey identified concerns of the study area,which could be addressed and
suggested remedies and/or steps to alleviate the negative impacts.
In April 2002,an organizational and informational meeting was held to start the
neighborhood plan effort.Households who responded to the survey of
households and businesses were invited.(Note:the response rate to the mail
survey was approximately 10.5 percent.)Approximately a dozen households
decided to continue involvement with developing a plan.The group of residents
while small did comprise all geographic areas within the Plan area.After five
months the group prepared a draft plan and distributed it to neighborhood
organizations within their planning area for comment.
January 9,2003
ITEM NO.:18 Cont.Birchwood-Walnut Valle Nei hborhoods Plan
Based on the survey,many in the area have positive feelings about the current
conditions with many more choosing not to respond at all.The group working on
the plan found that for those issues which are concerns,a solution often seemed
realistically not possible (such as the traffic concerns on Shackleford or Green
Mountain).However there are some things which can and should be addressed
within and for the area,the items placed in the Plan are considered achievable
and will help build on the positives while mitigating at least some of the
negatives.
The process used is the standard used for each neighborhood plan and the
resolution before the Commission is the various developed by the Commission
for neighborhood plans.Committee representatives will review some of the Plan
goals.They may also discuss some of the actions the group is recommending.
A Resolution of supporting the Vision and Goals of the Plan is before the
Commission.The Group working on the Plan has been informed that support of
the resolution does not necessarily mean support of each point in the Plan.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Beverly Hills,
Birchwood,Rainwood Cove and Walnut Valley.Staff has received no comments
from area residents,associations and only one minor comment form the Parks
Department.One letter raising concerns was received from representatives of
Emanuel Baptist Church.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 9,2003)
Walter Malone,of Planning Staff,reviewed the process used to develop the Plan
and reminded the Commission of the "Resolution"and meaning of approval of
the resolution.
Jeff Yates,of the Neighborhood Plan Committee,reviewed the goals and
discussed the reasons behind some of the action statements.
Commissioner Faust asked about involvement by the business community.
Mr.Malone stated all residents and businesses were contacted at the beginning
of the process.Unfortunately few to no businesses usually choose to
participate.A motion was made to approve the resolution and send the Plan to
the Board of Directors.By a vote of 8 for,0 against (3 absent)the motion was
approved.
2
PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE RECORD
DATE
MEMBER
ALLEN,FRED,JR.
FAUST,JUDITH
FLOYD,NORM
LANGLAIS,GARY
LQNIRY,BOB
MEYER,JERRY
MUSE,RQHN
NUNNLEY,QBRAY,JR.
RAHMAN,MIZAN
RECTOR,BILL
STEBBINS,ROBERT
MEMBER
ALLEN,FRED,JR.
FAUST,JUDITH
FLOYD,NORM o
LANGLAIS,GARY
LQNfRY,BOB
MEYER,JERRY
MUSE,RQHN
NUNNLEY,OBRAY,JR.
RAHMAN,MIZAN
RECTOR,BILL
STEBBINS,ROBERT
Meeting Adjourned,=-';:=.~P.M.
AYE ~NAYE '=.'='BSENT :-:,=-'--'BSTAIN,,:I-=,RECUSE
January 9,2003
There being no further business before the Commission,the meeting was
adjourned at 7:12 p.m.
l3ate '')
/
/II,,8 j/
ecr pry Chairman(..~"(L
I