Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_12 14 1993I LITTLE ROCK PLANNINS COMMISSION PLANNINQ REARINS S~Y ANG MINOTE RECGRn PECEMBER 14,1993 12:30 P.M. I.Roll Call and,Pinding of a Quorum A Quorum was px'esent heing ten (10)in number. II.Appx'oval of the Minutes of the November 2,1993 meeting. The Minutes of the Previous Meeting wexe approved as suhmitted hy a vote of 10 eyes,0 nays,and 1 open pos i't ion. III.Membexs Present:Brad walker Jerilyn Nioholson Kathleen Oleson John McDaniel Plane Chaohexe Joe Hirsch Sels Ramsey Ball Emmett willis,Jx'. Jim VonTungelnBillPu'tnam (One Open Position) City Attorney:Stephen Giles LITTLE ROCK PLAMNIMG COMMISSION P~ING REARING AGENDA DECEMBER 14,1993 12:36 P.M. I.Roll Call and Pinding of a Quorum II.Apgxoval of the Minutes of the Mowembex 2„1993 meeting III.PX'eeentatiOn Of Heax'ing Itema LITTLE ROCK PLAHMIHG COMMISSION PLAMMIMG HEARING AGENDA ZIECEMBER 14,1993 P BI I HEARI ITEM: Sermon Auto Glass Conditional Use Permit —707 Towns Oaks Brive (E-5492-A) 2.Amendment to City Land Use Plan —changing the wording of the Transition zone definition 3.Amendment to the Soning Ordinance dealing with signrestrictions 4,Z-5499-A Maheivaie Pike and Mabelvaie-Main Stxeet C-2 to C-3 5.Preliminary Plat —Pratt,Cates,Renunel Subdivision No.2 &8-986-B) Decembex'4,1993 XT l 5-4 2-A sermon Auto Glass Conditional Use Permit ~hXXQH:707 Towns Oaks Drive William A.Brandon/ William B.Putnam„Agent REQPQg~."A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the use of this existingy C-3 xoned building and sit e as an au'to glass shop and auto rental agency.The primary use of the site will be as afacilityfortheinstallation or replacement of auto glass. Approximately 720 square feet of the 3,440 s&Zuare foot building (26%)will be used as an office fox an auto rental agency. D T ARD This site is located one-half block noxth of Rodney Paxham Road,on the east side of Towns oaks Dxive. 2.'w The predominant zoning in the neighboxhood is C-3. The immediate vicinity contains a vaxiety of uses includingseveralrestaurants,auto related uses such as a muffler shop and tull service car wash,shopping centers and an assoxtment of freestanding commexcial uses. A laxge plant nuxsery is located one block to the south. Several large apartment complexes axe located in an area noxth and.west.of this site. An eguipment rental business,with outside storage/display of eguipment and materials.is located one block north ofthissite. The primaxy use pxoposed fox this site is an auto glass company.All uses pertaining to this business will take place within the enclosed building. December 1.4,1993 TRM -1 n in F hE -—-A The secondary use of the site will be an office fax an auto rental agency.This business will park approximately 8 vehicles on the site. The proposed uses are compatible with the neighbox'hood. 3,n;P rk'he site contains an existing,paved dxiveway and 33 space parking lot.two of which ax'e designated as handicapped. The auto glass company reguires 16 an-site spaces,leavxng 17 spaces available for the auto xental agency. All.improvements are currently existing.only minor intex'ior remodeling is proposed far the building. A previously appxaved site plan for this pxogexty showed landscaping in the thxee islands adjacent ta Towne Gaks Drive.Staff would recommend that this applicant also l.andscaye these areas. Na additional landscape scx'eaning or buffer is reguired. 5.i Ho comments 6. Ho comments 7.ha~~ Xn 1991,a conditional use permit was issued to allow fox the conversian of this existing building inta an automobilestereosalesandinstallationbusiness.At,tibet time,twa ovex'head doox's were installed on.the rear wall cf the building.That busxness has since xelocated. The applicant proposes to utilise the building far thesimilaruseofautoglasssalesandinstallation. As was the case with the previous use,all installation will take glace within the enclosed ibuilding. The secandary use proposed fax tike site is an automobilerentalagency.This particular company provides xeglacementvehiclesthraughinsurancecomganiesanddacenothavethe type af customer traffic that other rental agencies da,suchasthoselocatedneaxtheaixyoxt. 2 December 14,1993 I EM -A The rental agency office will occupy approximately 726 square feet (2W,)of the existing 3,448 square foot building.Gula about 8 vehicles available fox rent will be kept on-sits. Staff feels that the proposed uses are appropriate for the neighborhood and is supportive of the request. 8.n Staff xecommends approval of this application,subject to there being no outside storage of materials from the auto glass business and all installation of auto glass taking yl.ace ~ithin the enclosed building. Staff would also recommend that those axeas set aside for l.andscaying be upgraded and maintained. SUBDIVXSXGN CGMMXTTEE CGMMENT:(DECKER 9„1993) The appl.icant was not present.Staff presented the item and outlined the landscaping concern noted above. After a brief discussion,the Commi.ttee determined that there were no other outstanding issues and forwarded this item to thefullCommissionforfinalresolution. PAINS CGMMISSIGN ACTIGN:f,DECEMBER 14,1993) Mx.aim Hill was present representing the ayylicant.Thex'e were no obgectors present.Bane Carney,of the Planning staff, pxesented the item and a staff xecommendation of approval. commissioner Gleson asked if the applicant was willing to limit the parking of vehicles for xental to eight and to do the requested landscaping uygxade. Mr.Hill responded that limiting the number of spaces availablefox'ehicle x'ental.to eight would be agreeable and that the landscaping would be upgraded and maintained. A motion was then made to approve the ayyli.cation as recommended by staff with a limit of eight spaces for rental vehicle pax'king. The vote was 9 eyes,6 noes,1 abstaining (Putnam)and 1 openposition 3 December 14,1993 T TITLE:Amendment to the City. Land Use Plan LQCATIGM:Various RRQUEBT:In Transxtion Zones remove the "reguirement" for a PUD BQUHCE:Planning Staff +QgJ~~RT Beveral changes have occuxxed which make "reguiring"a plannedI unit development {PUD)not necessary.First in late 1989 and early 1996,the City approved a design review overlay for Highway 16.This overlay provides most of the pxotections envisioned in the Tx'ansition Zones PUD "requirement".The addi.tiomal protection is provided by the land use reguix'ament in a tx'ansition zone. The second change occurred in the sussaer of 1992.The City replaced the 26z district plans into one city Land Use Plan. During the review process,the land use desxgnation wereclarifiedandmadeunifoxmthxoughtheCity's planni.ng area. In each of the mixed land use designations,staff xecommended a PUD be reguired when any but the 1east intensive use was proposed.However,this "reguirement"was removed and replaced with a "recommendation".Bince »he Planning Commxssion believed the City could not and should no».require "PUD's"in mixed.land use categories,Transition Zone (a mixed lend use category)should also not have a"re((uix'e"statement.Fox axeas without overlay design pxo»ection,the recommendation for a PUD should be retained, Howevex in areas with ovex'lay protection,the pUD is no» necessary. TAFF D Approval (DECEMBER 14,1993) Ron Mewman,planning Manager„stated staff wished to amend the Transition Zone definition in the City Iand Use Plan. To change "PUD reguired"to "PUD recommended",this change would make the category the same as all mixed use distxic»s. December 14,1993 After some discussi.on about the history of Transition Zone designation,original purposes and effects with an ov'erlay in place,the Commission recommended changing the wording if an overlay was in place.There was additional discussion about the appropx"iateness of these changes. A motion was made to change the definition to reguire PUD in Transition Zones only where an overlay is not in place by unanimous wote. 2 december 14,1993 TEM KI~BR~X Ordinance Amendment. Boning Bl.gns Regulations Gexleral Discl1ssion axld Recommsndaticxl ~~E~T To amend the ox'dinance for purposesofmodifyingthex'egulations dealing with pennants,banners, lighting and,animation. The proposed amendments do three things: a)Expand tlhe time fox display and occasions per year fax banners and allow annual permit. b)Permit garments to be utilizedafterreceiptofBoardof Adjustment apgrowal of specific glaxls . c)permit any electronic message paxlel by light if meeting other oxdinance standards. ~The proposed amendments will notl a)Allow banners anywhexe at anytimebyright. b)Allow garments without public rewiew. c)A3.low flashing signs or mechanical copy change. ~TF~PRT: This hearing is the second of a sex'ies of meetings of owners,sign manufactuxers,the public and Planning commission forpurposesofdeterminingtheneedsofthecommunityforsalesattractiondewices, At.the Planning Commission meeting on September 21,1993,thepl.ans committee was charged with the task of adding citizen members to their number and developing an ordinance revision tobringbacktothePlanningCommissionbyFebxuary1,1994.The Committee met on October 1.4 to st.ructure the committee. December 14,1993 EM in The Committee added four persons.These were as follows: Bill Wiedawer,Quapaw Quarters Association Dick Layton,Layton Buick Ruth Bell„League of Women Voters of Pulaski County Tam Madding,Past,Signs A wcxk sessian was scheduled fox Navembex 11,1993.All committee members were pxesent and a good meeting developed. Planning Staff was given direction on each of the several points af concern raised.The staff then developed tlhe text and a companion discussion autlille for ease of use. This text was mailed to the Committee fox its review priar to the holidays.No changes were recommended and this suggested to the Chairman that the Committee should expedite this pxocess by an early hearing date,It waS deoided tO Set Deoember 14,1993 ae the second Public hearing and ta invite all af the participants to attend.Capies of all maitezials were mailed two weeks pziar to December 14 with the invitation. PLANNING CGNMXSSXGN ACTXGN«{DEC~BR 14,1993) The Chairman,Mr.Walker,identified the item f'x public hearing and asked that staff make a presentation.. Richard Waadi af 'the Plsnn31lg staff»offer'ed an «lv'erv3.ew af the ardinance amendment.He discussed the several axeas af text proposed fax challge and illustx'ated haw they would work and interplay with each other. Questions were offered by members of the Commission about tihe electxanic xeadex baaxds and animation.A lengthy discussion involvillg the staff and Commission followed with numerous «Xuestians concerning the appxapxiateness of electxanic reader. boards and whethex the Committee had determined to leave tihem out of the oxdinance. In response ta a «Xuestion fxam Chairman Walker,Waad stated that ithe electronic signs would be included in the sign allotment fax freestanding ax othex signs controlled by the allowance in the current oxdinance,They would not be permitted as addxtional 8 3.g118 Animation became a point discussed by sevexal commissionexs. Most commissiollers felt that the Commission shauld not allow animation and that it needs clarification through properdefinition.Planning staff agreed that this should be dane. 2 December 14,1993 T n in The Chairman then 'turned 'the heax'i.ng to comments of thos8 attendance submitting cards on the matter.Before comments wexe xeceived,Richax'd,wood of the staff pxesented a letter from Mx .Richaxd,Drummond cf Donrey Outdoor Advertising.Xn theletterMr.Drummond expressed concern for not being allowed totiebannerstobi,l,lboards. The fixst person to speak was Dick Layton,x'epxesenting the Dick Layton Buick-QMC dealership.Mr.Layton was the auto dealexs representative on the Pl.ans Committee drafting the ordinance. Mr,Layton expressed his appreciation fox the efforts made to draft.a wox'keble ordinance and stated that the auto dealexs could live with this draft. The next speaker was Mr.Jenkins of the Advertising and Promotion Commission.He stated that he xepresented Mr.Travis and said his concern was that they have limited signage and would like to better utilize the electx'onic sign they now have.He said this sign could do a lot more that is currently restricted as to its phasing.Be stated,that,what he heard from staff today was that this pxoposal would allow the kind of message phasing desired. Commissionex Zim VonTungeln offered that he undexstood in Commi.ttee discussion that the animation would not be allowed completely.The changeable copy would be permitted., Richard Wood xesponded by reading the new provision on animation which would permit animation in its entirety.He said the l.anguage does not specifi.cally mention animation,but it would allow such under the genexal language offered. Commissioner Oleson stated that she feels this ordinance allows what most people don't want.At this point in the discussion,it moved to the axea of where you draw the line between movement, change and animation, Ruth Belly of the League of Women Voter's of Pulaski County& presented hex thoughts as a Sign Ordinance Committee member and a xepresentative of the League.She first stated that she must have missed some direction,and she thought that there would be more work sessions by the committee px'ior to submittal of the draft to the full Commission.Mrs.Bell stated that animated signs were inappxopxiate and the League stxongly opposes the ordinance draft on electronic signs,especially if it makes it possible to animate by x'ight,She said the ordinance should not, pexmit attractive nuisances,Mrs.Bell said she would be more comfortable if the Commission removed the movement.potential altogether. Mrs Bell then moved hex counts to the subject of bannexs and speci.al events.She outlined what was discussed by the Committee and the different numbers proposed.Mrs.Bell compared the 3 December 14,1993 proposal and the existing ordinance and said the league opposes such a drastic modification of the code. Commissioner willis then offered his view of what the committee had done.These are maximums that will not necessaxily beutilisedeverytime.Re also discussed',the x'elationship of banner cost to manufacturing and the allowable display time. Commissioner Willis explained by saying weather and.other factors become involved. Richard,Wood,ezzpanded these comments by illustrating how differezzt retailer's sales vary gzeatly as to the t.ime of display and how the four occasions per yeax's the key.zze stated that.if all sizz weeks axe zzot utilixed for an evezzt,the balance islostfoxtheyear.Mrs.Bell suggested that the City should not second guess business.She said people will use what you give them. Commissioner Putnam asked Mrs.Bell,about pax't.icipation in the committee meetings,His guestion expanded to pxocedure as to whether there was a «ote of the attendees. Mrs.Bell responded to Commissionex putnam's guestion by statingtherewasonemeeting.That meeting was very harmonious with theideastossed,about xesultiug in directing the staff'o come up with azz ordinance dxaft.There was nc vote duxing this meeting. Mrs.Bell stated that she felt ther'e would be another meeting to iron out differences and further develop the oxdinazzce. Commissioner VonTungein responded to Mxs.Bell's second meeting by saying he felt the issues had all been exposed and that Richard.Wood was instructed to put together an ordinance.Be didnotfeelanothercommitteeworksessionwasneeded. Chairman Walker'ointed,out the distribution of information invol.ving many people in the process.This was accomplished to gain participation.Be suggested that this meeting of the full Commission will serve to simply bring the other members of the Commission up to speed on the ordinance draft. Richard Wood then offexed,that,he felt this meeting is valuable because at some point in the development of an oxdinance proposal.„you need to go back to the full Commi.ssion and feel outdIirectiontoassurethat.you are cn,the right track.He saidthatnumerousmeetingswouldbetonoavailifonthewrongtrack. Mrs.Bell stated that the total of 24 weeks is unacceptable from the League's point of view. Commissioner Putnam commented that all things cannot be clone byxegulation.You need enforcement,interpretation,and follow-upinthefutuxebystafftohaveworkableregulations. December 14,1993 I n Mrs.Bell stated that perhaps it is understood by some that this signage would only be utilized by South University Avenue and.the businesses 3.ocated on this street."That i.s not the case"withthisstatement,she concluded hex remarks on these points. Commissioner McDaniel said that it has always been his intentiontohelpbusinessesnothinder.He commented on cost.identified by business owners and the effect upon investment by short pexiodIs of sign usage,He said that Ihe did not feel most owners would utilize the allowable number of weeks given the natux'e of many sales.He asked whether Mx.Dick Layton desired to address the guestion of sign and banner cost. Mr.Layton identified the number of occasions per year that an auto dealer typically would erect banners.He discussed the extensive and expensive radio,television and otihex advextising media utilized iby Ibis business.Mx.Layton said a banner simplyfillsin~here people see the banner while dx'iving by but did not see the other ads,He closed his comments by saying that customers respond to guestions by saying they drove by and saw the banner ox notice and stopped.Mx.Layton further stated that he bas or will spend up to 840,000 on sales promotion items such as discussed in tlhis meeting.These costs are not paid fox two week usage. Mxs.Bell then asked wihether Mr.Layton could use his entireyear"s allotment of days end to end.Richard Wood responded by saying that tlhere would be need fox specially review and permitting,He said additional pexmits would be reguired to extend a sale over six weeks,but this would commit a second al1owab1e event leaving two fox the year, A general discussion followed involving Commissioner VonTunge3.n, Mr.Layton,and others.lt involved the six week time period proposed by this ordinance draft. The conversation then moved to a suggestion of Commissioner VonTungeln that tlhe animation be left out,but that changeable copy be left,in without,restriction. Wood suggested that,a good definition of animaticn is needed to proper3y administer and enforce this oxdinance. Commissioner VonTungeln then asked Wood how the automated signprovisionwouldbehandledonastripcenter,by tenants or bysite.Wood responded by saying since the sign wou3.d be consider'ed part of the conventional sign allotment,it would be handled as any sign permit for mixed use developments, A lengthy discussion followed involving several commissionexs andstaff.The discussion centered on allotment of banners as acollectiveeffortversusindividualbusiness.The result wasthatbannersmountedonthebuildingwouldbeperstorefront or 5 December 14,1993 by use.The freestanding bannex would be identified as the cemtsr's banner as a whole unless ane tenant was allowed.toutilizethenumber,location,and size permitted. elm Dawson,of the Planning staff,inserted his tlhoughts on signadministrationatthispoint.He stated,that many issues cannot be foreseen in drafting an ordinance text.They will came ta him and maybe the Hoard of adjustment far interpretation. Chairman Walker then identified what he felt were the issues to resalve at this time.These being the six week time fx'arne perevent,the common parcel identity with multiple tenants,the paragraph d under Section 36-557 yxoviding fox twa special devices,and anima»ion,Chairmam Walker said he umdsxstood Commissioner VonTungeln ta re@nest working through the items today for a completed ordinance dxaft, Commissxoner Willis offered genexal camments why.the Committeesetthesixweeks. Commissioner VonTungeln said that he felt this was a gaod ordinance considering no ane wanted t:hs fire»,dxaft which completely opened,the doox .This agyx'oach is a middle gxaundi whex'e we have people looking at extxemes an batlh ends. Camsissionex'icholson offered hex concerns for the time allowance and exgressed the thought that almost six man»hs ofspecialeventtimeismaybeexcessive.HOwevex',Slhe supports thedraftbecauseshsfeelssomeaneusingtheirtimesndtoenddefeatstheirpurposes. Commissioner Willis asked staff if the draft includes a prohibition against,end to end events.This would allow 24 consecutive weeks.Richard Waod xespanded by sayimg that thecantral.s here are vested in the business oyeratar xeceiving an annual permit for special events.Tihis permit would be obtained when the first event is to be held.The secand,third,and fourth events cauld and would occur any»ime the balance of the yeax bytelephonecall,which is to say t:hat two events could IbeconsecutivesuchasaJanuarysalearaFebruarysale.This would not preclude end to end,but it wauld uss uy all af theallottedfaureventsgeryearinasihoxtperiod. commissioner Selz then stated that Ihe felt the Committee had done a good job in offexing this ox'dinance draft. Riohard waod of staff responded to Cammissioner McDaniel's retreat for a vote by asking for resolution of several issues hefelt;had not been resalved. Commissioner Oleson inserted the thought that for something so important,the Commission seems to be in a hux'ry with sa few meetings.She said this dxaf»,is too general in nature and allows almost anything. 6 December 14,1993 ITEM in After'he Chairman instructed wood to pxocsed wilth the sevexaltextissuesgWoodreilussted'that the Commission determine whether we are at ths end of the committee meeting yrocess and whether we axe going to the Hoard from this meeting with an ordinance.The Chairman said the Commission should resolve most of ths issues inthismeeting.wood then proceeded to offsx his Guestions.They wexe as fo3.3.ow: 1.Do we need a specific definition of animation since we are apparently going to eliminate that potential from the languagey The xssgonss received was yes.A definition or othex language is reguirsd with prayer structuring in the ordinance language to identify animation. Stephen Giles,of the City Attorney's Dffice,indicated thatthisdefinitionneededtobecomprehensiveandwouldassist in defense of the ordinance and especially where we identify what is offensive to the community about animation. 2.DO We need to specifically define "special event"since it now appears to be critical to the end to end banner display'P The answer xeceived was yss.xn oxdsr to delineate thedifferencebetweentheoccasionandtheproduct.The commission later decided that such a definition was not needed,but each pexmit would be a syscial event regardless the purpose. 3.The multig3.e tenant issue versus community signags ox. banners.Do we need more 1anguage'P The answer received was yes.The insertion of language to pxohibit freestanding banners when a mi.x of tenants or individua3.banners are used and not to ai.low both simultaneously. 4.The discussion of time limits suggested by the pennant:s px'ovision which would restrict how 3.ong the Hoard of Adjustments approval could be yermitted.The Commission offex'sd sevex'al thought.s in x'esgonse to this guestion. Stephen Giles insexted comment:s on the powers and duties oftheHoardofAdjustment.Commissionex'CDaniel expressed concern about,constantly reinvsnting issues.His opinion was there should be no limit but trust staff and the HoardofAdjustmenttcmakedecisions. A lengthy discussion of enforcement followed. Stephen Giles,of the City Attorney*s office,offered insightintowhytheCityrestxictsdpennants,banners,etc.in the 7 DeCsmbex 14,1993 development of the current ordinance.Be said the ordinance needs to provide a basis for proper interpx'station and enforcement. Commissioner Qlesan said she felt,this pennant pravision would bebettsx'efended if a time were inserted.She felt interyretation could cause tx'auble whethex'aard of Adjustmsnt ar staff. A general discussion of possible review foxmats was concluded byconsensusfeelingthatstaffshouldnatdothereview. Chai.rman walksx asked if thsxe was a consexxeuS ta complete this revi.ew tadaY ax defex to the Cammittee ar table the i.ternaltogsthex.Mx.VanTungeln responded by saying that the ordinance shauld,be vat:ed on,eithex'p ox"dcwxx tadaY. The Chairman asked Mrs,Bell if she had additional camment.s an hex position,Mrs.Bell stated she wanted claxification on thsstaffversustheBaaxdafAdjustmentxeview,Chaixman Walkexstatedtheprapasalasit:had been di.scussed.. wood offexed a follow-up comment.t:hat the Commit:tee decided it. di.d nat want garments.If theY are to be allowed at.811,it should be through a public review process dealing with thei.r value,the erection,and aypeaxance. Jim Lawson commented that,he had a pxoblem with wind dxivendevicesofaxLYstyleartype. Commissioner oieson suggested that maybe what the Plaxuxing Commission needs to do is gull these garments cut af theordinancedraft:Richard woad resgaxNed by saying that.ServiceChevrolet's pennant.proposal is what initiated this oxdinance review and if ths Planni.ng commission does nat want to pursue t.hem 1st us take it out of the draft,but be awaxe the ax'dinancsforBoardxsviewwauldnotthemdealwiththeissuethatstartedthisprocess. Chairman Walker then offered comments leading to anothsxdiscussianantimelimitsandwhetherthex'eview px'ocess should be a conditional use permit not a variance. Stephen Giles,of the City Attorney"s Office,echoed theconditionalusepermitcomment,The Chairman then offered athreeelementvoteasameanstomoveanthi.s mattsx.StephenGilessaidthatnomattexwhatapproachischosenitshouldbe aunified.agpxaach ta solution of ths i.ssuss and nat peace meal theitemtotheBoardofDix'ec'tox'S. It was then determined that ths section on pennants be removed from tllis draft and returned ta the Committee fax further.study and that.the balance of the ordinance be forwax'ded to the BoardafDirectazswiththesuggestedchanges. 8 Becember 14,1993 A matian was then made bZ Commissioner lSichalsan that approval.of the ordinance be granted with deletian of tlhe wording dealing with two banners yer event in paragraph D,Bection 36-557 and deleting yaragrayh e and adding to paragraph 4,Bubsectian Ccharacterizationafelectronicmessageboardsastogivelife or perception of li.fe and eliminate animation from electronic sign boards Bteyhen Giles asked if special events needed to be included indefinitions.The Chairman indicated that his reading af the discussi.an is that a special event is when someone re@nests a permit.He felt no definition is needed. A second ta Commissioner Ni.cholsan motion was made.A vote on the mati.on yraduced 16 eyes,O nays,0 absent.and 1 apenyosi.tion. The sign ordinance amendment,as modified,was approved withinstructiontoforwardittotheBoard.af Directors for the next appropriate public bearing.Commissianer VonTungeln then offered to again hold meetings with staff and others to work fur'ther on the pennant's issue. 9 december 14,1993 4 0wner .Jones Corporation Applicant:Dim Hill Location:Mabelvale Pike and MabelvaleStreet Re@nest:Rezone fxom c-2 to C-3 Purpose:Commercial Size:4 acx'es Existing Use:Vacant North —Vacant,zoned R-2 and OS South —Vacant and Single-Family,zoned R-2 East —Single-Family and Multi-Family,zoned R-2 west —vacant,zoned R-2 ALT The site under consideration is located at the intex'section,of Nabelvale Pike/West and Main Street in the iwabelvale neighborhood.The pxoperty is cuxxently zoned C-2,and therequestistoxezonetheacxeagetoC-3 for a conveniencestore.(xn 1991 a total of 5.5 sexes was rezoned to c-2 and08.The 08 axea is not part of this application.)ThepropertyisvacantandsomeofithasbeenclearedI. zoning in the area is primarily R-2.within a block ox'wo of the property„there axe sevexal parcels zoned C-3,C-4 and 1-2.Across the railroad tracks,the existing zoningalsoincludesC-3 and 1-2.The site abuts R-2 and 08 zoning on all the sides.Land use is a mixture of single family„multifamily commercial,industrial and a police substation. Some of tlhe uses axe still nonconforming,and there a numberofundevelopedtx'acts found thx'oughout the general vicinity. The Qeyer Spxings West plan identifies the site fox commercial use,&The pl.an was amended when the site wasxeclassifiedtoC-2 in 1991.)Because of the pxopexty beingsituatedattheintersectionoftwominorarterialsandtheplan's recommended land use,either C-2 or C-3 axe theappropriatecommercialdistrictsfoxthelocation.StafffeelsthatthereguiredisiteplanreviewinC-2 is not a December 14,1993 IT cxitical element because of the sxte's relationshiy to other pzayexties andI thexe axe no unigue physical features which a development needs ta be sensitive to. The yexmitted uses in c-2 and c-3 are similar.Therefore,a C-3 reclassification should not generate any new comcexms. E The adopted plan recommends commercial use.The yraposed C-3 confoxms to the plan amd thexe are no outstanding issues. E I There are mome to be xeyox'ted, TAPP Staff recommends appxoval of the C-3 xexaning request. PLANMIMG COMMISSION ACTION:(DECEMBER 14,1993) The applicant„Jim Hill,was present.Thexe were na objectors in attendance.There was no discussion about tlxe request, A motion was made ta recommend ayyxaval of the C-3 rezoning. The matiam passed by a vote of 9 eyes,0 nays„1 absent amd 1 abstention (Bill Putnam). (The Planning Casssissiam also waived the bylaw pxavision far pasting a sign an the property at least 30 days pxiox to the hearing date.The sign was posted fax 21 days.) 2 December 14,1993 ITEM FILE —-B ~AME:PRATT,CATES,REMMEL SUBDIVISION 02 ~A~TI :At the south-east ccrnex'f Lindsey Road and Px'att Remmel Road,south to Fraxier Pike Road ~BEVEL PER:~Ei~IR: ROLAND R.REMMEL MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS,XNC.P.G.Box 2219 900 Nest MarkhamLittleRock,AR 72203 Little Rock„AR 72201666-0571 371-0272 AREA:27.28 ACRES E L :9 T W REET:1463 ~KX:X -2 R ED E:Induatx ial P I DX TRI T:24 ~E TR~AT:40.01 VARI RE E TED:None TATEME T F PR PG The developex proposes a preliminary'lat to contain 9 industriallots.Associated.with the development of the property,dedication of right-of-way fax and construction of the extensiononPxattRemmelRoadisproposed.Gne intexnal cul-de-sac street.is anticipated.The developer grogoses to sell the lotsindividually,so final plate on the individual lots ax'e proposedtobefiledasthesesalesareconsummated.The streetimpxovementsaxeanticipatedtobeaccompli,shed as the lots axesoldandthefinalplateaxefiled, A.PR P AL E The develcger regueata ayprOVal by the Planning CcmmieaiOn.of a preliminarF ylat fax'9-lot industxial subdivision. Impx'ovements to Fxazier Pike Road axe anticipated;theextensionofPratt.Cates Remmel Road,tc tie the dead-end ofPxattCatesRemmelRoadtoFrazierPikeRoadisgxogosed;and,construction of an internal cul-de-sac stx'eet isindicated.No vax'iances are requested. B.EXX TI I I In zu1y of 1993,a preliminaxZ plat was approved by thePlanningCommissionfox'his same piece of property'.Atthattime,a buYer for one lot was pending,and,since therewasinadeqpxatetimetodevelopafinalschemefortheentire December 14,1993 ITEZ4 zz XL -8 tract,a 3-lct interim scheme was proposed.This new gxagasal is a more detailed plan for the tract. The majority of the site,except far the lot noted above which was platted earlier in 1993,is undeve3.oped,althoughitisclearedaftreesandvegetationiscut,Construction,of a new facility on the previously platted lat is neaxizzgcompletion.The abutting ax'ea is developing as amindustrialareaandsitestathenaxth,east,amd,west axe zamed 1-2 with new industri.al facilities exi,sting in 'theseareas.The axea to the south,across Fxazier Pike Raad,hasscatteredruralxesidencesandiszonedR-2,Px'att Remmel Raad dead,-ends appxoximate3y 756 feet moxth of Fxazier PikeRaad.Thexe is a temgoxary turn-arouzzd at the sauth end ofPrattRemmelRoad. C,E I EERX TXLXTY MKE T The City Engineering Department will rezXuire the improvementofFxazierPikeRaad.one-half the width of Fxaziex'ike must be constructed to the same stamdaxd as the remainder afFrazierPikeRoadtotheeast,with a pa~ed shoulder and zzocurbandgutter'. Wastewater Utility report.s that a sewer maim extension will be required,with easements,im order to serve all the 3.ots shown.An existing 42"force main crosses the pragerty,and no comnection can be allowed to this main.Mo permanentstructuxemaybebuiltovextheUtility's easement. The Fire Depaxtment has approved the submittal without cazmzemt . Water Utility,APkL,ARKLA,and Southwestern Bell have not resyozzded due to the short time frame fram the application and the hearing date. D.E EAL E XALDE I The develaper needs ta plan on building the entire length oftheplannedextensionofprattRemmelRoadwhenevex'ither'at 4 ax Lot 5 axe platted,and not plan on building a segment of it with anather temporary turn-around,whezzevereitherLot4orLot5aredeveloped,the entire frontage ofeither3.ot along the cul-de-sac street must be constructed. E .~Y~X The intended use is in confarmance with the existing zaning. The preliminary plat which has been submitted cantains nodeficienciesintheinformationsubmittedoxinthedesign. 2 December 14,1993 F. Staff recommends approval of the request.subject to the developer pxesenting an overall final plat when the last lotofthephasedevelopmentistobeplatted. ~TAPP PM This item will be considexed by the Subdivision Committee at the Committee's December 9,1993 meeting.A report on the COmmittee'S diSCuSSicn,aa well aa anY additicnal Ccmmente xeceived fxom the utilitY companies/departments,will be made at the Commission heaxing. BDX 1 I TT E T:(DECEMBER 5,1993) Staff presented the re(Exeat.The applicant's engineer was present.The discussion outline was reviewed with the applicant. with only minimal discussion,the item was referred to the Commission fox'inal ac'tion. P I MN A TX (DECEMBER 14,1993) Staff px'esented,the item to the Commission and xeported thattherewexenooutstandingissues.A motion was made and seconded.to approve the preliminarY plat.The motion passed with the voteofSeyes„no naYs,none absent,2 abstention and 1 openposition. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE RECORD DATE C (99 Lt~I~5 —NC (did'SE.'HT MEMBER Z.5 5 BAI.L,RAMSEY /8".30 CHACHERE,DIANE WILLIS,EMMETT MCDANIEL,JOHN NICHGLSQN,JERILYN ((( GLESQN KATHLEEN VQNTUNGELN,JIM PUTNAM,BILL r~"pg ~~H pg WOODS,RONALD SW 745//(( SELZ,JOE H. WALKER,BRAD TIME IN AND TIME GUT BALL,RAMSEY CHACHERE,DIANE ( WILLIS,EMMETT t I (I MClDANIEL,JOHN (l (( NICHGLSON,JERlILYN QLESQN,KATHLEEN VGNTUNGELN,JIM PUTNAM,BllLL WOODS,RONALD SELZ,JQE H. WALKER,BRAD ((( AYE 4 NAYE ABSENT * ABSTAIN Meeting Adjourned Z-'"((K P,M. December 14,1993 P~IMG HEARING There being no further business before the Commission,the meeting was adjourned at 2."49 p,m, D ~. Chairman e rata