HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_08 13 1991LITTLE ROCK PLANNING CONNISSION
REZONING BEARING
NINUTE RECORD
AUGUST 13,1991
1:GG P.N.
1,Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
The Quorum was present.being ten in number.
II.Approval of the Ninutes of the Previous Neet.ing
The minutes of the July 2,1991 meeting wexe approved
as mailed,*
1II.Nembers Present:Fred Perkins,Chairman
John NcDaniel
Ramsey Ball
Diane Chachere
Rose Collins
Jerilyn Nicholson
Kathleen OlesonBillPutnam
Joe Selz
Brad Walker
Nembers Absent.:Waltex'iddick,III
City Attoxney:Earnest Sandex's,Jr.
REZONING HEARING
AUGUST 13,1991
UEFERREU ITENS:
A.Z-5449 Stagecoach Road R-2 to I-2
B.Z-5451 4716 Baseline Road R-2 to C-4
C.Z-5452 2322 Brag@ Street R-4 to C-4
U.Z-5453 Colonel Glenn and Shackleford Road R-2 to I-2
REZUNING ITEKS:
1.Z-3572-A Alexander Road C-3 to R-2
2.Z-4635-B I-30 and Childers Utrive R-2,C-3,
C-4 andI-2 to C-3
3.Z-5472 Rodney Parham and Hinson Road R-2 to C-3
UTHER NATTERS:
4 Z-5471 Hiss Selma's School C.U.P.
August 13,1991
ITEN NG.:A Z-5449
own ex".Merchants Realty Company
Applicant,:Joe D.White
Locat.ion;Stagecoach Road (north of
Baseline Road.)
Reguest.:Rezone from R-2 to I-2
Purpose:Industrial
Size:7 8 acx'es
Exist.ing Use:Warehouse (Vacant.)
SURRGUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North -Vacant,zoned R-2
South —Vacant,zoned R-2
East.—Vacant.,zoned R-2
West,—Vacant and Single-family,zoned R-2
STAFF ANALVSIS
The property in guestion is located on Stagecoach Road
(Highway 5)just north of Baseline Road.The xequest is to
rezone the 7.S acres from R-2 to I-2.Currently,there axe
three structux.es on the property,and all axe unoccupied atthist.ime.In the past,the buildings were utilized for
warehousing and othex related activities.Fourche Creek
bisects the southeast.corner of the site and there is a
substantial floodway involvement on the property.
Zoning in the general vicinity is R-2,C-2 and C-3.Land
use is more mixed than the zoning and includes single
family,a church,commercial,auto sales,auto services and
industxial.Throughout the area,a high percentage of landisst.ill vacant.,especially east of Stagecoach Road because
of Fouxche Creek and the wetlands.
The Gttex Creek Plan recognizes a port.ion of the property
for industxial use for the land axes outside of the
floodway.Based on the land use element an I-2
reclassification fox the nonfloodway ax'ea is appropriate.
The remaining acreage is identified as floodway on the land
use plan.City policy states that.floodway lands are to he
zoned GS and dedicated to the city.In this case,a
1
Augus't 13„1991
ITEN NO.:A 2-5449 i Cont.
majority of the property is in the floodway and,in fact„
two of the structures and a port.ion of the third building
are in the designated floodway.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
1.Stagecoach Road is classified as a pxincipal artex ial
and the xight.-of-way standard is 55 feet fxom the
centerline.Dedicat.ion of additional right-of-way will
be required because the exist.ing x'ight-of-way is
deficient.
2.Dedication of established floodway.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of I-2 for the axe@ outside of the
floodway and OS fox the floodway lands.
PLANNING CONNISSION ACTION:(JULY 2„1991)
At.the request of the applicant„the item was placed on the
Consent Agenda fax'defex'ral.A motion was made to defer
the issue to the August 13,1991 hear'ing.The motion was
approved by a vote of 9 ayes,O nays and 2 absent.,The
Planning Commission a3.so voted to waive the bylaw
requixement for requesting deferra3.s.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 13,3.991)
The applicant was represented by John Buxnett.There wexe
no objectors in attendance.Nr.Burnett xeviewed the
request and stated that.the Coxps of Engineexs was sti13.
studying the floodway question.He then requested a,
deferral until there was some type of resolution of the
floodway issue.
Jerx'y Gaxdner,a city engineer,then addressed the Planning
Commission,Nr.Gardner discussed the requirement for the
dedication of additional right-of-way on Stagecoach Road and
explained the dedication of the floodway 3.ands outside the
existing fence.Be concluded by stating that the floodway
needed to be zoned OS„and the area outside the floodway
should be rezoned to I-2.
2
August 13,1991
TEN No,:A Z-5449 Cont.
A motion was made to defer the request for a period six
months with allowance to return earlier if necessary.
The motion was approved by a vote of 1Q eyes,0 nays and
1 absent..
3
August 13,1991
ITEN NG.:B Z-5451
Owner:Dale and Ron Broadaway
Applicant:Ran Broadaway
Location:4716 Baseline Road
Reguest:Rezone from R-2 to C-4
Purpose:Mini-stoxage units and
Rug Doctor
Size:2.84 acres
Existing Use:Nini-storage units and
Rug Doctor (nonconforming)
SURRGUNDINQ LAN USE AND ZGNINC
North —Single-family,zoned R-2
South —Commercial,zoned R-2
East -Single-family,zoned,R-2
West —Commercial,zoned R-2
STAFF ANALYSIS
The pxoperty at 4716 Baseline Road is currently zoned R-2,
and the xeguest is to rezone the site to C-4.Currently,
thexe are two uses on the 2.8 acres,a gxoup of mini-storage
units and Rug Doctor.Both uses ax.e nonconfoxming and,the
ownexs would like to add another stx'ucture to house
additional storage units.Rezoning of the site must.first.
be accomplished because the ordinance prohibits expansion of
nonconforming uses.Also,site plan review will be required
because of having multiple buildings on the pxopexty.
In the surrounding ax'ea„the primary zoning is R-2;other
nearby zoning includes G-3 and C-3.Land use is a
combination of single family,mobile home parks,a chux'ch,a
school,office and auto related uses.For properties that
front on Baseline,the existing uses range fx'om a chux'ch to
a small neighborhood commercial center.The site
undex'onsiderationabutssinglefamilylotsontwosides and a
commercial use to the west.Directly across Baseline Road,
there is a commercial use.
The Geyei Spx'ings East land use plan shows the property as
part of a large commercial area that extends fx'om Geyer
Springs to Doyle Springs.Reclassifications to nonresiden-
1
August 13,1991
ITEN NG.:8 -5451 ont.
tial districts in the immediate vicinity have been to either
0-3 or C-3,Because of the previous zoning actions in the
neighborhood,staff feels that C-3 is more consistent with
the area.A C-3 rezoning wil.l maintain the zoning pattern
established by other rezonings and px'ovide a level of
commex'cial services that are compatible with the adjacent
properties.
In the C-3 district.,mini-warehouse units are listed as
conditional use.Therefore,a condition use permit will
need to be approved by the Planning Commission,in addition
to the rezoning action to allow the new units.The
conditional use permit.process requix'es a site plan,so the
multiple building issue would be addressed by the pexmit
x'euler
ENGINEERING CQNHENTS
The right-of-way standard for Baseline Road is 90 feet„or
45 feet.from the centerline.Dedicatio~of additional
right-of-way will be required because the exiting
right.-of-way is deficient.
STAPF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of C-3 and.not.C-4 as requested.
PLANNINQ COMMISSION ACTION:(JULY 2 „1991)
Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred.A
motion was made to defer the request.to the August.13,1991
meeting.The motion was approved by a vote of 9 eyes,
0 nays and 2 absent,
PLANNING CONNISSION ACTION.(AUGUST 13,1991)
Ben Kittler was present and stated that.he was xepxesenting
Ron and Dale Broadaway,the owners.There were no
objectors,Nx.Kittler indicated that the owner's have no
problems with the C-3 reclassification if the site's
nonconforming status did not.become an issue.
Jerry Gardner,a city engineer,commented on the
right-of-way dedication for Baseline Road.Also,he
discussed a franchise possibility for the building
encroachment.There wexe additional comments made about
the right-of-way dedication and a franchise agxeement.
2
August 13,1991
ITEN N .:B Z-5451 Cont.
Nr.Kittler then amended the reguest to C-3 and agreed to
dedicating the necessary right-of-way for Baseline Road.
A motion,was made to recommend approval of a C-3 rezoning as
amended.The motion passed by a vote of 10 eyes,0 nays and
1 absent.
3
August 13,1991
ITEN NG.:C Z-5452
owner:Dewey Ratcliff
Applicant:Dewey Ratcliff
Location 2322 Bragg Stxeet
Request:Rezone from R-4 to C-4
Purpose:Auto Sales and Repair
Size:0.15 acres
Existing Use:Vacant
SURROUNDING LANID USE AND ZQNING
Noxth —Single-family,zoned R-4
South —Storage,zoned R-2
East —I-30 Right.-af-Way,zoned R-4
West —Vacant,zoned R-4
STAFF ANALVSIS
2322 Bxagg Street is currently zoned R-4 and the awner
proposes ta utilize the si.te for auto sales and xepair.To
allow the uses,the pxopexty must first be xezoned ta C-4.
The site is a 50 ft.resident.ial lot with a vacant residence
an it.The corner af East 24th and Bragg Street.is situated
in close proximity ta the old VA IHaspital an Roosevelt Road
and adJacent ta the I-30 rlgh't-af-way (This lot is a
number af feet below the finished grade of the interstate
roadway )
Zoning an the west side of I-30 is R-4,0-1,0-3,C-3 andI-2.The lat abuts R-4 on twa sides„and acrass East 24th
Street,the zaning is I-2,The 6-1 lot to the north was
rezoned several years aga for a barber shop,however„the
property is still vacant.land.use in the immediate
neighbarhaad is single family,a church,auto service,
industrial starage,a park and the old VA Hospital complex.
Between East 21st Street and East 24tlh Street,,the land useisresidentialwithascatteringofvacantlots.Along East
21st Stx'eet, the pattern vaxies somewhat with the addit.ian
af several office and neighboxhood cammercial uses.Sauth
of East 24th,the land use changes from residential ta
commercial and industrial.
1
August 13„1991
ITEN NG.:C 2-5452 Cont.,
The lot at 2322 Bragg Street is not a C-4 site and the
requested reclassification is totally inappropx iate for the
location.Even though the property shuts an interstate and
has I-2 zoning across the street,the lot is part of the
residential neighborhood north of East 24th Street.This is
reinfoxced by the land use element of the Central City
district.plan which shows the property fox'ingle family
use,And finally,a C-4 rezoning and certain uses allowed
in C-4 coubd have an adverse impact.on the residential
environment.of the neighborhood.
ENGINEERING CONNENTS
None reported.
STAFF RECONNENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the C-4 xezoning xeguest.
PLANNING CGNNISSIGN ACTION:(JULY 2,1991)
Staff informed the Commission that the xezoning reguest
needed to be deferred.The item was placed on the Consent,
Agenda and deferred to the August 13„1991 meeting.The
vote was 9 eyes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING CGNNISSIGN ACTION:(AUGUST 13,1991)
Staff reported that the applicant submitted a wxitten
reguest to withdraw the C-4 x'ezoning without prejudice.A
mot.ion was made to withdraw the item without prejudice.
The mot.ion was appx'oved by a vote of 19 eyes,o nays and
1 absent.,
2
August 13,1991
ITEN NO.:D Z-5453
Owner:Richard F.Toll
Applicant.:Patxick N.NcGetrick
Location:Colonel Glenn Road and
shackleford Road (southwest.
corner)
Request.:Rezone from R-2 to I-2
Purpose:Industrial
Size:28.38 acx'es
Existing Use:Vacant
SURROUND1NG LAND USE AND ZONING
Nox'th —Vacant,zoned I-1
South —Vacant,zoned R-2
East —Industrial,zoned R-2 and I-1
Nest.—Vacant and single-family,zoned R-2
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request is to rezone 28 acres that.front Colonel Glenn
and Shacklefoxd Road from R-2 to I-2.No specific plans for
the property have been submitted,so the type of development
ox use mix is unknown.The site is situated on the south
side of Colonel Glenn,west of Shackleford and approximately
2,000 ft.east.of I-430.The proper'ty is vacant and heavily
wooded.
Zoning in the axea includes R-2„C-2,I-1 and I-2.Across
both Colonel Glenn andI Shackleford,there axe existing I-1
tracts.The existing land use is single family,commexcial,
industrial and a junkyard,Thex'e are a number of vacant.sites found in the area.
The I-430 district.plan shows the property and a large area
south of Colonel Glenn Road fox industrial development..
Therefoxe„an industxial reclassification conforms to the
adoptive plan and is appropriate For the site under
consideration.Because of previous zoning act.iona,staff
does suggest that the land be rezoned to I-1 and not,I-2 as
requested.I-1 is the district that has been utilized for
properties south of Colonel Glenn and continuing I-1 pattern
should be reinforced thxough the current.request..(I-1 is a
1
August.13»1991
ITEN NO.:D -5453 Cant.
site plan xeview district..)In addition ta the I-1,staff
also recommends that.a 50 feet OS strip be zoned an the west
side of the property because of several xesidential uses
along Talley Raad.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
Dedication of additions).dedication will be required far
both Colonel Glenn Raad and Shacklefax.d Road,
1.The right-of-way standard far Colons).Glenn Road is
55 feet.from the centerline.
2.The right-of-way standard for Shackleford Road is
45 feet from the centerline.
STAFF RECONNEN ATION
Staff recommends approval of I-1 and a 50 foot OS stxip
adjacent ta the west praperty line.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JULY 2,1991)
Pat NcGetx'ick,the applicant,asked that the item be
deferred ta the next zoning hearing.There were na
objectaxs present and the item was placed on the Cansent
Agenda.The rezoning was defex'red to the August 13,1991
meeting by a vote of 9 eyes,6 nays and 2 absent.,The
Planning Cammissian also vated ta waive the bylaw provision
for requesting deferrals.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 13,1991)
Staff infarmed the Commission that the applicant wanted the
I-2 x'ezoning request withdrawn without prejudice.A mation
was made ta withdraw the item wi.thout.prejudice.The motion
was approved by a vote af 1O ayes,6 nays and 1 absent.
2
August.13„1991
ITEN NG,".1 Z-3572-A
Owner:Singletree Corporation
Applicant,:Joe D.White
Location:Alexandez Road (at the city
limits)
Request:Rezone from C-3 to R-2
Purpose:Si.ngle Family
Si,ze:0.99 acres
Exist.ing Use:Vacant
SURRGUNDING LAN USE AND ZGNING
North —Vacant and single-family,zoned R-2 and the
City of Alexander
South —Vacant and single-family„zoned R-2
East —Vacant,zoned R-2
west.—Vacant and mobile home park,the City of
Alexander
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request is to rezone approximately one acre in far
southwest.corner of the city from C-3 to R-2.The site is
adjacent to Alexander Road and abuts the City of Alexander
along the north property line.At this time,the land is
vacant,but is being cleared for a single family
development..fA residential plat is in the process of being
reviewed by the Planning Commission,which includes acreage
in both Little Rock and the City of Alexander.)
zoning in the area (for properties in little Rock)is R-2
and R-7A.There is no zoning in the city of'lexander.
Iand use is more mixed than the zoning and includes single
family,mobile home park,churches and several small scale
commercial uses.Currently,all the nonresidential uses are
found in Alexander.
In 1981,the property in question was rezoned to C-3.The
request also included land to the north that was rezoned toI-2.Since the initial rezoning in 1.981,the I-2 area has
been reclassified to R-7A.The applicat.ion involved a total
of ten acres in Little Rock with the balance of the
ownership in the City of Alexander.
1
August 13,1991
ITEN NQ.:1 Z-3572-A Cont
Rezoning the site to R-2 conforms to Qtter Creek District
Plan and is the appropriate action to take at this time.ThesitedoesnotlenditselftoagualityC-3 development.,and
the parcel should have never been rezoned to a commercialdistrictinthefirstplace.The reclassification will not.
have an adverse impact on any of the surrounding properties.
ENGINEERING CQNNENTS
Alexander Road is classified as a minor arterial.The
existing right-of-way is deficient and dedication of
additional right-of-way will be reguired.The right-of-way
standard for a minor arterial is 45 feet from the centerline.
STAFP RECQNNENBATIQN
Staff recommends approval of the R-2 rezoning.
PLANNING CQNNISSIQN ACTI N:(AUGUST 13,1991)
The applicant was present,.There were no objectors and the
item was placed on the Consent Agenda.A mot.ion was made to
recommend approval of the R-2 rezoning.The mot.ion passed by
a vote of 10 eyes„Q nays and 1 absent..
2
August,13„1991
ITEN NG.:2 Z-4635-B
Gwnex'entral Property
Hanagement/William L.
Huffstutlar
Applicant:Willi.am L.Huffstutlar/
Ronahd E.Tabor
X.ocation:I-30 and Childers Drive
Reguest.:Rezone from R-2„C-3,C-4 andI-2 to C-3
Purpose."Retail
Size:16.4 acres
Existing Use."Single Pamily„Gffice and
Commexcial
SURRGUNDING LAND USE AND ZGNING
Noxth —Residential,zoned R-2
South —I-30 Right-of-Way,zoned R-2
East -Hobile Home Park and Commercial,zoned R-2
West.—Chuxch,zoned R-2
STAFP ANALISIS
The issue before the Commission is to rezone 16.4 acres from
R-2, C-3,C-4 and I-2 to C-3 fox a large retail user.ThesiteissituatedsouthwestoftheArkansasHighwayand
Transportation Department complex,and has frontage on threestreets,Baseline Road,Childexs Drive and the I-30
fxontage/sexvice road,There are several types of
structures on the R-2,C-3 and I-2 tracts,including single
family,office and a building that is currently beingut.ilized by a chuxch.The C-4 land and the western portion
of R-2 are undeveloped..
History on the property dates back to 1984 when the I-2
parcel was rezoned.In 1986,the C-3 and C-4 tracts were
rezoned.Wi.th both zoning actions,some of the land
adjacent to Baseli.ne Road was left R-2;the depth ranges
from 150 feet,to 200 feet.This was done to protect several
existing single family residences in the nox'theast corner of
the site and to provide a buffer for the residential uses on
the nox'th side of Baseline Road.
3.
August 13„1991
ITEN NO.".2 Z-4635-8 Cont.
Zoning on both sides of I-30 includes R-2,C-3,C-4 and I-2.
The property abuts R-2 on the east side and the existing
zoning across Baseline Road and Childers is R-2.The land
use found in the general vicinity is made up of single
family„multifamily,mobile home parks,commercial,
industrial,a large church,and the State Highway
Department.The existing commercial uses i~elude a motel,
eating places„retail,auto services,outside sales and
motorcycle sales.A number of the existing commercial uses
on the north side of I-30 are nonconforming.Throughout the
area„there are also some undeveloped tracts.
The property in question is addressed in the Otter CreekDistrictPlan,however,due to a recent reconfigurat.ion of
several planning districts,the site is now in Geyer Springs
West.The current land use element identifies the southern
portion of the 16 acres for strip or commercial development..
The area adjacent to Baseline Road is single family on the
plan.A plan amendment,before the Board of Directors willshiftthecommerciallineslightlytothenor'th in attempt.to conform to the existing zoning line.Also,the amendment
changes land use designation from "strip development"to
"mixed commercial/industrial".
A C-3 reclassification of the site that,already has the
nonresident.ial zoning,C-4 and I-2,is proper,and shou.ld
not create any hardships for the surrounding properties.
The zoning issue that must be resolved with this applicati.oniswhetherornotitisappropriatetorezonetheR-2 area,
to C-3.Endorsing the reguest as filed would move the
nonresidential zoning line 150 and 200 feet.to the north
and,therefore,place C-3 property directly across thestreetfromseveralresidentialuses.
Staff has carefully reviewed the question of rezoning
the R-2,and we are comfortable with the concept.of
reclassifying the full R-2 strip to C-3.It.is our
position that the existing residential uses on the north
side of Baseline Road should only experience a minimal
impact.,if any,from the rezoning the entire acreage.
Because of the buffer requirement,45 feet.adjacent to
Baseline Road,and the street.right-of-way,there will be
adequate separation between the residential area and the
nonresidential use to help eliminate any potential land
use conflicts,.And finally,the area has undergone other
zoning actions without feeling any affects.The addition
of three acres of C-3 land will not compound any
neighborhood problems that may exist.
(The other reguired buffers are 30 feet on the west,42 feet:
on the east and 45 feet along the I-30 frontage road.j
2
August 13,1991
IT NO.;2 Z-4635-8 Cont.
ENGINE RING COMMENTS
1,Baseline Road is classified as a principal axterial,
and the right-of-way standard is 55 feet.from the
centerline.Dedicat.ion of addit.ional xight-of-way will
be required because the existing x ight-of-way is
deficient.
2.Childers Dxive xequires a right-of-way 30 feet from the
centerline.
3.Because there could be some traffic and access issues,
contact with both the Arkansas Highway and
Txansportation Department and city engineering should
be made as soon as possible.
STAFF RECONNENDATION
Staff xecommends approval of the C-3 request as filed.
PLANNING CONNISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 13,1991)
The applicant was present..There wexe no objectors in
attendance and the request.was placed on the Consent Agenda.
A motion was made to recommend appx'oval of the C-3 rezoning
as filed.The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes,
0 nays and 1 absent.
3
August 13„1991
ITEN NO.:3 Z-5472
Owner:Nx.and Mrs.W.R.Camp
Applicant:Hr.and Nxs.W.R.Camp by Beth
Zaunex'ocation:
Rodney Parham Road and Hinson
Road (Northwest Corner)
Reguest:Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Puxpose:Commercial
Size:2.41 acxes
Existing Use:Single Family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
Noxth -Vacant and Single-Fami.ly,zoned R-2
South —Nuit.ifamily,zoned R-5
East.-Vacant,zoned PCD
West —Vacant and Single-Family,zoned R-2
STAFF ANALYSIS
The northwest corner of Rodney Paxham and Hinson Roads is
curr'ently zoned R-2,and the reguest is to rezone the
propexty to C-3 for an unspecified commercial user.Thesiteencompasses2,4 acres with street frontages of
approximately 4OO feet of Rodney Parham and 182 feet.on
Hinson Road.There are a total of five structures on the
property„two residences,a detached carport.and two
accessory buildings.
In the general vicinity of the Rodney ParhamjHinson
intersection„the zoning is R-2„R-5,NF-24,O-3,C-3,
C-4 and PCD.To the east on Rodney Paxham for several miles,
the existing zoning pattexn can be best descxibed as a
commercial strip.There is also some commexcial zoning on
the east side of Green Mountain Drive,south of'odney
Parham.Going west on Hinson Road,the zoning is pximarily
residential„however„ther'e are some office tracts and a
PCD site on the south side of Hinson.West and north of
the site is the Pleasant Valley development.,which is zoned
R-2 and R-4 (the golf course).
1
August:13,1991
ITEN NO 3 2-5472 Cont.
I,and use is similar to the zoning and includes singl.e
family,mult.ifamily,office,commercial,a cemetery and a
golf course.The property under co~sideration shuts a
vacant tract on the west and across Valley Club and Buff
Lane,there are single family residences.The northeast
cornex'f the intersection is zoned PCS for specific
x'etail user,but it is undeveloped at this time.
The Pleasant Valley District Pl.an identifies the site for
office use,as well as the north side of Rodney Parham from
the Hinson intersection to Hidden Valley Orive.The plan
also shows the south side Hinson Road from Napa Valley back
to the east.for office development.At the intersection of
Hinson and Rodney Parham,only the southeast corner,zoned
C-2,is recognized for commercial use on the plan,(Because
of changes to the planning districts,the Pleasant Valley
District no longer exists and is now part of the River
Nountain,Chenal and Rodney Paxham Districts).
A commercial reclassification of the property is in
conflict.with the adopted plan,and staff does not.support
the x"equest.The proposed C-3 rezoning is a significant
deviation from the overall direction of the land use element.,
and C-3 would have a negative impact.on some of the
surrounding px'opex'ties.Continued use of the site as single
family is probably unrealistic,however,rezoning to C-3 is
just as questionable and totally inappropriate.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
The right,-of-way standard fox Rodney Parham and Hinson Roadis45feetfromthecenterline.Dedication of additional
rights-of-way vill be requ.ixed because the exist.ing
rights-of-way are deficient„Rodney Pax'ham may need more
than the 45 feet of right-of-way depending on the design of
the intersection and a possible turning lane.
STAFF RECONNEN)3ATION
Staff recommends denial of the C-3 rezoning xequest.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 13,1991)
The applicant.was represented by wes Lovder.There were
approximately 25 objectoxs in attendance.Nr.Lowder
provided some background information and said that he
understood that there was a lot of opposition to the
rezoning.He stated the ovnexs,the Camps„have lived
2
August 13,1991
ITEN NO.:3 Z-5472 Cont,
on the site for a numlber af years and have never had a
desire ta sell their property until now.He went.on ta
describe the'insan Road/Rodney Parham intersection and the
future videning of Hinson Road.Nr.Lowder indicated that.
the propased improvements to Hinson IRaad vauld p3.ace the
roadway just several feet.fxam the existing xesidence,and
the Camps did,nat want the road in their fxonit door.He then
described tlhe thinking which led to filing the C-3 request,
including a meeting with the staff.He did point aut that
the staff discouraged a commercial rezaning at this time.
Nr.Lowder said the Camps were sensitive ta the neighbarhaad
and they wanted to be coopexative.He then proceeded to
discuss a PUD far the praperty and some af the potenitial
drawbacks with utilizing the PUB process.Alsa,he stated
that the Camps were not interested in deve3.oping the
property,but they just wanted to sell it.Nx.I ovder
cancluded by stating there vas some room fox compromise and
they vere apen ta G-2 or C-2 ta ensure addit:ional reviev by
the Planning Commission.
Hal Kemp spoke and stated that,he vas representing some af
the neighbors opposed to the C-3 rezaning.Nx .Kemp then
proceeded to discuss the xequest and staited that it was not
in harmony witlh the resident.ial neighboxhoodl nox vas it
campatible with the same neighboxhood.He then described
Rodney Parham and Hinson Road as the last barriers to prevent
commercial encroachment into the Pleasant Valley Subdivision.
He went an ta remind the Commission of the Board ofDirectars'mphasis on protecting and preserving residential
neighiborhaods.Mr.Kemp stated that the Camps were good
neighbox's and tlhe neighbaxhoad appreciated the Camps
resisting commercial development of the pxopexty up to this
point.He said that most of the neighbors were not planning
to move and would be adversely impacted by commercia3.use on
the site.IHe tlhen disputed the notion that C-3 ar office use
was the highest or best use of the land.Nr.Kemp asked the
Commission to imagine a xesidential deve3.apment.,patio homes,
an the site with a laxge wa3.1 along IRodney Paxham and Hinson
Road.He stated an attached xesidential use vas consistent
with the neighborhood,and a Texaco station was not.
Nr.Kemp requested the Commission to be sensitive to the
neighborlhcad and to reject,the C-3 rezoning,
Bart NcAninch„a resident:in the immediate vicinity,spoke
and stated tlhat there was a serious traffi.c prob3.em in the
area.Mr.NcAninch described ether rezanings that have
created water prablems far him,and said he vas opposed ta
any zonimg other tlhan sing3.e family.
3
August 13,1991
ITEN NO ~".3 -5472 Cont.
William Burgess spoke against.the rezoning and voiced some
of the same concerns as those raised by Nr.Kemp and
Nr.NcAninch.Nr.Burgess stated that.traffic was the
major problem and a commercial use of the corner would
severely compound the situation.He indicated that.some
kind of townhouse development fox the site would be a
reasonable option.
Mes Lowder spoke again and indicated that.a C-3 reclassi-
fication appeared to be inappropriate for the site.He
discussed the possibility of amending the application and
made some additional comments about the area and modifyinq
the request.He then stated that he would like to work
with the surrounding residents and asked for a 36 day
deferral to come up with some equitable solution other
than residential.Nr.Lowder felt that leaving the property
R-2 was unfair to the Camps.
Hal Kemp responded to Nr.Lowder's comments.Nr.Kemp
stated that.a deferral was appropriate and the neighbors
were willing to meet.with Nr.Lowder.
There were some addit.ional discussion„and Nr.Lowder then
formally requested a 30 day deferral.He said he would make
every effort to meet with the property owners to resolve the
rezoning issue ~
A mot.ion was made to defer the request.to September 24„1991.
The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and
1 abstention (Kathleen Gleson).
4
August 13,1991
ITEN NG.:4
NAME:Miss Selma's —Conditional Use
Permit (E-5471)
LOCATION:7818 "T"Street
OWNER APPLICANT:Michael B.and Robin R.Smith
PROPOSAL:Development of a Childcare
Facility
O DINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS
1.Site Location
There are fenced residential lots to the west.Two
residential lots are to the east.The other lots to
the east provide parking and facilities for a coin
operated car wash.
2.Com atibilit with Nei hborhood
The proposed use is very compatible with the
neighborhood.There axe at.least five other structures
belonging to the applicant.which serve as childcaxefacilitiesinthisblockof"T"Stxeet.,
3.On-Site Drives and Parkin
The applicant plans to use the existing circular dxive
and parking that i.s located on the site across from the
proposed site."T"Street dead-ends to the west.where
the current parking is taking place.
4.Screenin and Suffers
The applicant.plans to utilize the existing maturetreesandfoliageforscreeningandbuffers.If moreisneeded„then the applicant will comply.
5.Cit.En ineex.in Comme ts
The Engineering Department has recommended to the
applicants that they file for a x'ight.-of-way
abandonment for "T"Street which shuts the applicant's
property.
1
August,13,1991
ITEN NO.:4 Cont.
6.Staff A al s's
The intent of the applicant.is to remodel a single
family home into a childcare facility.There will
be no modification of the exterior of the structure.
The interior will be xemodeled to accommodate four
classrooms with a capacity of 8 to 1O students and
one teacher per classroom.There will be xemovable
playground equipment on the front lawn.
Access to the building will be by foot from "T"Street
up to the existing driveway.Traffic will move down"T"Street which dead-ends west of the proposed use.
The children then will be taken by a teacher from the
delivery vehicle to the building..The vehicle will
then move thxough an existing circular drive in front
of the proposed site.
The entire block (Lots 2 through 6)adjacent and to the
south has been operated as a school for grades K
through 6th,and childcare facility for a long period
of time.The building will be operated as a childcare
facility for children ages 2 through 4 years old.
Bours of operation will be fxom 7:3O a.m.to 6:QQ p.m.,
Nonday thxough Friday.
7.Staff Recommendat o
Staff recommends approval of the Condit.ional Use permit
subject to the applicant filing for the right-of-way
abandonment and its approval.
SUBUIVISION CONNITTEE CONNENTS:(JULY 18„1991)
The applicants were in attendance.Staff gave an overview
of what the applicant was requesting.Berry Gardner of
the Engineering Oivision stated that it would be to the
advantage of the applicant to abandon that.portion of"T"stx'eet that fronts all the structures.The applicant's
stated that,although they do not own all of the lets,thexe
should not be a pxoblem.Staff also advised the applicants
to submit a mastex'lan showing the structures the school
alxeady occupies.
Thex'e being no additional discussion on this item,the item
was forwarded to the full Commission for action.
2
August 13,1991
ITEN NO.:4 Con't,
PLANNING CDNNIS IDN ACTION:(AUGUST 13,1991)
The applicant.was not in attendance.There were no
objectors present.There was some di.scussion about.whethez
the item should be heard in the absence of the applicant.A
mot.ion was then made to defer this item until the next
meeting fax.the Planning Commission on September 16,1991.
The motion passed by a vote of 16 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent..
ENGINEERING CONNENTS UPDATE:(AUGUST 22,1991)
As stated in the Subdivision Committee's Act.ion,there was
some concerns about the applicant needing to abandon a
portion of "T"'treet,that fronts all of the structures.It
has now been determined by the engineexing staff that.thexeisnolongeraneedfoztheabandonment.Staff has also
been informed that the circulation pattern meets the tzaffic
engineezing staff's approval.
At.the request of the Engineering staff and agzeed upon by
the Planning Commission chairman,this request.will be heaxdattheAugust27,1991 Planning Commission public hearing.
3
PLANNING COMM/SSION VOTE RECORD
OATH u /8 IP9''nmsew u A c~ewDA /peaubaw A c&ewaA
NENHER /z c D B
v'
y v v'
v
v v
V v v'
v'v ~9
v'V'
A
v w I
v'v
XNE OUT
Hall Ramse j '.04
1 ..-
NcDeniel,John
'.0a
Riddick Walter III
f'oc
k
AguN&&hiED A 7
Y AYE Q NATE +ABSENT +ABSTAIN
August 13„1991
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting was adjourned et.2:05 p.m,