Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_11 14 1995LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING MINUTE RECORD NOVEMBER 14, 1995 9:00 A.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being ten (10) in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Commission approved the minutes of the October 3, 1995 Planning Commission meeting by a unanimous vote. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Diane Chachere Herb Hawn Ramsay Ball Bill Putnam Doyle Daniel Suzanne McCarthy Mizan Rahman Ron woods Larry Lichty Sissi Brandon Pam Adcock City Attorney: Cindy Dawson, Steve Giles LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING AGENDA NOVEMBER 14, 1995 I. DEFERRED ITEMS A. Z-6035 10124 Darris Drive R-2 to C-3 B. Agape Church -- Conditional Use Permit (Z -3789-F) C. Cellular One Tower -- Norwood Lane Site -- Conditional Use Permit (Z-6061) D. Central Arkansas Library Conditional Use Permit (Z-6075) II. REZONING ITEMS 1. Z -4789-A 11801 Kanis Road MF -18 and R-2 to C-3 2. Z -5452-A 2322 Bragg Street R-4 to 0-1 3. Z-6063 301 East Roosevelt Road C-3 to C-4 4. Z-6064 7610 Stagecoach Road R-2 to 0-1 5. Z-6069 3229 Mary Street R-3 to R-5 III. OTHER MATTERS 6. G-23-242 -- Block 8, Pope's Addition Alley Right -of -Way Abandonment 7. Z-6068 -- Hunt Short -Form PCD, located at 3201 Kavanaugh Blvd. 8. Z-6071 -- Williams Day -Care Family Home Special Use Permit, located at 9531 Woodford Drive 9. Adoption of proposed 1996 Planning Commission Calendar KI la -Ph C - �7 0 I A-------------- LITTLE ROCK i �MJ 1 -so it ' a f I E:selrne � \ 8.1 _ ``• . / I Location Map REZONING AGENDA' ��� NOVEMBER 14,1995 �7 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: A Z-6035 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Gary and Debra Linn Gary and Debra Linn 10124 Darris Drive, Southwest corner of Darris Drive and Mabelvale Cut-off Rezone from R-2 to C-3 Unspecified commercial use .24± acres Single -Family residence SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, zoned R-2 (0-3 rezoning is pending at the Board of Directors) South - Single -Family residence, zoned R-2 East - Single -Family residence, zoned R-2 West - Single -Family residence, zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Mabelvale is classified as a minor arterial. The centerline of the roadway is 35 feet from the property line. Dedicate 10 feet of additional ROW to bring to 45 feet from centerline of the roadway. Dedicate a 20 foot radial section at the corner. With Planned construction, widening of both streets will be required. Darris Drive will need 1/2 street improvements with underground storm drainage and a 31.5 foot radius for the corner of Mabelvale. Sidewalks will be required on both streets. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Geyer Springs West District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is not in conformance with the Plan. There is a Plan revision before the Commission in this area. This item should be deferred until the Plan Amendment is acted on by the Commission. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: A Z-6035 (Cont.) STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .24± acre lot from R-2 to C-3. The lot is currently occupied by a single family residence. No specific use is proposed for the property. The property is located on the southwest corner of Mabelvale West Road and Darris Street, in the Mabelvale Community. The zoning pattern in the immediate area has begun to change recently, due in part to the realignment of Mabelvale Pike/Mabelvale West Road. The realignment of this arterial street has precipitated the rezoning of properties on the north side of Mabelvale Pike/Mabelvale West Road to C-3 and 0-3. The pocket created between the newly realigned arterial and the railroad tracks has undergone transition in recent years as well. This area contains several single family homes, including the applicant's' and several vacant, R-2 zoned lots. There are properties within this 3 block area which are currently zoned C-1, C-3 and C-4. Due to the realignment of the arterial and the apparent transition of this 3 block pocket, it may be appropriate to consider an alternative to single family residential zoning for this area. The Land Use Plan currently recommends Single Family for this site. The Planning Commission is reviewing a proposed amendment to the Geyer Springs West District Land Use Plan, which includes this area. The Commission will review that matter at its next Plans Hearing on October 17, 1995. Staff believes it is appropriate to defer action on this rezoning request until the proposed Plan Amendment is determined. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends deferral of this item to the November 14, 1995 rezoning hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 3, 1995) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had agreed to defer the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 14, 1995 meeting with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 2 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: A Z-6035 (Cont.) STAFF UPDATE At its October 17, 1995 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of an amendment to the Geyer Springs West District Land Use Plan which affects this site. Under the amendment, this site will be classified as Mixed Office Commercial. The Mixed Office Commercial category provides for a mixture of Office and Commercial uses to occur. A Planned Unit Development is recommended if the use is entirely Commercial or if the use is a mixture of Office and Commercial. The Land Use Plan Amendment is scheduled to be heard by the Board of Directors at its November 7, 1995 meeting. Staff will update the Commission on the Board's action. There is no specific use proposed for the property which would seem to preclude proposing a Planned Unit Development application for the site. In the event no PUD is proposed, the Mixed Office Commercial land use category recommends that the site be zoned Office. The rezoning request is speculative in that the applicant proposes to sell the property once it is rezoned from residential to a nonresidential classification. Staff cannot support C-3 zoning at this location but can support office zoning for the site. The property has 140+ feet of frontage on an arterial street which tends to support an 0-3 classification. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff does not recommend approval of C-3 for this site. Staff does recommend approval of 0-3 in lieu of a PUD to conform to the recently adopted Land Use Plan Amendment. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) (The item was moved to the end of the agenda since the applicant was not present.) The applicants Gary and Debra Linn were present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and gave an update on the Land Use Plan amendment and the effect of the amendment on this property. Staff recommended denial of the C-3 request but stated that 0-3 could be supported for this site. The Commission was informed that the applicant was requesting a waiver of the right-of-way dedication requirement. Commissioner Chachere asked if the applicant could come back to the Commission at a later date with a PUD application. Steve Giles, of the City Attorney's Office, responded that 3 , November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: A Z_-6035 (Cont. it would take a new application and that PUD's required a site plan. Debra Linn addressed the Commission. She stated that she would prefer C-3 zoning for her property but that she would accept 0-3. In response to a question from Commissioner Chachere, Mrs. Linn stated that no specific development was proposed for the property. Commissioner.Chachere told Mrs. Linn that she could come back to the Commission with a PUD application, once a specific development is proposed. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated that staff would prefer to see several properties combined and presented as a PUD, perhaps for a neighborhood commercial development. He stated that piecemeal zoning applications such as the applicant's and others being discussed in the area were not as desirable as one combining several smaller properties into one. In response to a question from Acting Chairman Ball, David Scherer of the Public Works Staff discussed the right-of-way requirement for Mabelvale West Road. He stated that an additional 10 feet of right-of-way was required for Mabelvale West Road to comply with the Master Street Plan. Mr. Scherer stated that a franchise could be granted to allow the existing structures to remain in the right-of-way as long as the property is residentially occupied. Commissioner Putnam noted that street improvements had been constructed on the applicant's side of the street and asked if the required additional dedication could not take place at the time the property is sold to a potential developer. Mr. Scherer responded that the dedication should occur through the rezoning. Mrs. Linn also questioned the need to obtain additional right-of-way at this time. She stated that the property was no longer viable as a home and that the realignment of Mabelvale West Road had rendered the site unlivable. During a further discussion of the street, Mr. Scherer stated that the centerline of the street was currently 30 feet from the property line and 40.7 feet from the Linn's house. He stated that the City put in curb and gutter on the south side of the street to control vehicles on the road and drainage. Mr. Scherer stated that the curb is 15 feet from the property line and if an additional 12 foot wide traffic lane is built, the curb would only be 3 feet from the property line; thus the need for the additional 10 foot dedication. 4 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: A Z-6035 (Cont ) Commissioner Lichty asked if there was compensation to the Linns since the City did not acquire sufficient right-of-way when the street was widened. Mr. Scherer stated that there was compensation in the form of a higher zoning classification and presumed higher land values. Commissioner Rahman stated that the City rendered the site unlivable by constructing the new road; necessitating rezoning the property for the Linns to have some value in it. Debra Linn stated that the City had ruined her "American Dream" by building the road and asked the Commission to approve the rezoning. The question was called and the application as amended to 0-3 was put forward for a vote. The Commission approved the 0-3 request with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The request for a waiver of right-of-way dedication was brought to a vote. The vote was 4 ayes, 5 noes and 2 absent. The split vote indicated no clear recommendation. 9 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z -3789-F `I LOCATION• Agape Church - Conditional Use Permit 701 Napa Valley OWNER/APPLICANT: Agape Church/Joe D. White PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow an additional parking lot on this existing church site, zoned R-2. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the east side of Napa Valley Road at St. Charles Blvd. 2. Compatibility with Neicihborhood: The proposed parking lot expansion will be located on a small portion of the existing Agape Church site. Access to the proposed parking lot will be gained through the church site, utilizing existing drives. Surrounding uses include a large single family residential neighborhood and several multifamily developments. The proposed development should be compatible with the neighborhood. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: The church sanctuary has a seating capacity of 2,300, requiring 575 parking spaces under current ordinance standards. The site has 372 existing parking spaces. On May 16, 1995 the Little Rock Planning Commission granted a conditional use permit to allow an additional 98 spaces. The applicant proposes to construct an additional 60 spaces, giving a total of 530 on-site parking spaces. 4. Screening and Buffers: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet ordinance requirements. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -3789-F Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. 5. City Encrineer's Comments: Napa Valley Road is a Minor Arterial (5 lanes) on the Master Street Plan that over the years was constructed to a 4 lane standard. Due to the increasing size and volume of traffic, a center turn lane is required for the entire length of the property along Napa Valley Road. A minimum width is required in order to allocate 5 lanes of traffic on a 55 foot section. A grading permit and stormwater detention analysis is required. 6. Utility Comments: No Comments 7. Staff Analysis: Agape Church is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of an additional 60 space parking lot on R-2 zoned property. The new parking lot will be located on the principal church site. Access to the expanded parking lot will be through the church site, with no direct access onto Napa Valley. Staff believes the proposal to be a reasonable use for this property, which should have a minimal impact on the adjacent neighborhood. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the application subject to compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinance and City Engineer Comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 12, 1995) Joe White was present, representing the application. David Scherer, of Public works, reviewed his comments with Mr. White and the Commission. There was a brief discussion regarding the existing interior landscaping. The Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. E November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -3789-F PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31-, 1995) The Staff presented the item, stating that the applicant failed to send the required notices to adjacent property owners, and has requested a deferral of the hearing of this item until the November 14, 1995 agenda. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral until the November 14, 1995 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, with conditions. Staff noted that the applicant is requesting a waiver from the Master Street Plan requirements for construction of one-half lane (7 feet of pavement) for the addition of a turn lane on Napa Valley Road, running the entire length of the church property. David Scherer, of Public Works, addressed the waiver request and stated that Public Works is against the waiver. He gave reasons for the need for the turn lane. He stated that the recent additions of parking lots to the church property and the addition of a traffic light at St. Charles Blvd. and Napa Valley Road make the turn lane a necessity. Commissioner Brandon addressed the waiver request regarding the boundary of the turn lane. Commissioner Chachere asked if the striping of the street would be done by Public Works and what the cost of the project would be to the church. Commissioner Rahman stated that the lane would stop at St. Charles Blvd. Commissioner McCarthy had concerns as to the monetary burden that the church would bear. Commissioner Daniel stated that there is a need for off-street parking as no future parking on Napa Valley Road would be allowed. Commissioner Chachere asked if the growth of traffic on Napa Valley Road warranted the turn lane. Commissioner Putnam stated that there is a safety need for the additional lane and the church should be able to burden the cost. 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -3789-F Joe White addressed the Commission in support of the application. He restated the church's request for a waiver. He stated that the cost of the one-half lane would be approximately $25,000. He briefly discussed the boundary of the turn lane and pointed out the access points to the church property. David Scherer pointed out that the turn lane would provide much needed stacking space on Napa valley Road. Mr. White stated that the church needs the parking lot because the City has restricted parking on Napa Valley Road. Commissioner Ball addressed concerns of traffic problems on Napa Valley Road. Jim Bowers, representing Agape Church, spoke in support of the application. He stated that this parking lot addition is the third of a three phase project. He stated that the street widening was not mentioned with the first two phases of the project. He stated that the church hires off-duty police to direct traffic. He stated that the church could not hear the additional expense of widening the street at this time. Commissioner Lichty asked about the church's membership and growth projections or any future phases. Mr. Bowers did not have that exact information. Commissioner Putnam restated his concerns about traffic safety. Mr. White recommended a two year deferral to Mr. Bowers. Commissioner Woods stated that he could not see justification for the waiver. David Scherer stated that Public Works would be agreeable to deferral of the street improvements for the period of one year. Commissioner Chachere stated immediate concerns of public safety. The Chairman called on a vote on the conditional use permit application. The conditional use permit was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The Chairman called for a separate vote on the waiver request. The vote was 0 ayes, 10 nays and 1 absent. Commissioner Putnam then made a motion to defer the street improvements for a period of one year. Jim Lawson, Planning Director, stated that the recommendation needed to be a formal vote. 4 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -3789-F Steve Giles stated that the applicant has up to three years to obtain a building permit and the deferral should be one year from date of issuance of building permit for the parking lot. A motion to that effect was made and seconded. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 5 nays, 1 absent. 5 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO • Z-6061 NAME: Cellular One Tower, Norwood Lane Site - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: Just east of Norwood Lane, north of Pinnacle valley Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Gene Ludwig/Cellular One by Hunter Stuart PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the placement of a 120' tall cellular phone tower and a 12' X 20' equipment building on a 50' X 50' lease area located within this R-2 zoned, one acre site. A height variance is also requested for the tower. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The proposed tower site is located approximately 600 foot east of Norwood Lane, north of Pinnacle valley Road. The site is outside of the city limits, but within the City's Extraterritorial Zoning Jurisdiction. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The adjacent property on all sides is zoned R-2 and is vacant and wooded. The proposal should have little effect on the surrounding property. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Access to the site will be gained by utilizing a 12 foot wide access easement which runs from the end of Norwood Lane to the site. There are no parking issues. 4. Screenings and Buffers: The proposed lease area will be totally enclosed by a 6 foot wooden screening fence. 'November 14, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6061 The face side of the proposed fence must be directed outward. 5. City Engineer's Comments: No apparent Public Works issues 6. Utility Comments: No Comments 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant requests a conditional use permit to allow for the placement of a 120' tall cellular phone tower and a 12' X 20' equipment building on a 2,500 square foot lease area at the southwest corner of the larger one acre tract. Also, a height variance is requested. A maximum height of 120' is requested for the tower, which exceeds the maximum height (751) allowed by ordinance. The proposed site is located approximately 2 miles outside the Little Rock city limits, within the City's extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. The site is vacant and wooded as is all of the surrounding property. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the application as submitted. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 12, 1995) Joe White was present, representing the application. There were no comments and the Committee forwarded this issue to full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 1995) The applicant, Hunter Stuart, was present. There was one objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval as submitted. Charles Granderson, representing the Charles Norwood Estate, spoke in opposition to this application. Mr. Granderson stated that he was opposed to the placement of the tower, as this one 2 November 14, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6061 acre site is in the middle of, surrounded by, the Charles Norwood Estate. Mr. Granderson stated that the tower placement could possibly hurt future development of the Charles Norwood Estate property. Hunter Stuart addressed the Commission in support of his application. Mr. Stuart discussed the proposed location of the tower and gave reasons for the proposed location. Mr. Stuart stated that this site is needed in order to provide adequate service to Cellular One customers. Mr. Stuart also stated that the proposed location was chosen because of the remoteness of the area and the fact that the tower should have no adverse impact on the surrounding property. Gene Ludwig, property owner, addressed the Commission in support of this application. Mr. Ludwig also discussed the location of the site and stated that the tower should have no visual impact on the surrounding property. Charles Granderson then restated several points made earlier. There was some discussion between the applicant, Mr. Granderson, and several commission members as to the location of Mr. Granderson°s property in relation to the proposed tower site. Hunter Stuart then asked for deferral of this item until November 14, 1995, at the recommendation of the Planning Commission, in order to work out details with Mr. Granderson. The question was called and a vote was taken to defer the item until the November 14, 1995 agenda. The vote was 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicant, Hunter Stuart, was present. There were several objectors present, representing the Charles Norwood Estate. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. Staff gave a brief update on the item and presented the Commission with two letters of objection from Ada Norwood and John and Gwendolyn Greene. Hunter Stuart addressed the Commission in support of his application. Mr. Stuart informed the Commission that he had a meeting with Mr. Grandison, but they reached no conclusions. Mr. Stuart reviewed the proposed tower location and the surrounding properties and ownership. Commissioner Brandon asked if the tower could be moved to another location within the one acre tract. 3 November 14, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6061 Mr. Stuart stated that Mr. Grandison will not support any other location within the one acre tract. Commissioner Chachere asked what Mr. Ludwig planned to do with the remainder of the one acre tract. Mr. Stuart stated that it would not be developed. Commissioner Woods asked about the visibility of the tower. Mr. Stuart stated that there are 60 to 80 foot trees covering the property and Mr. Grandison should not be able to see the tower from his house because of the topography of the land. Commissioner Ball asked about the type of tower and its width. Mr. Stuart stated that it would be a monopole with no guy wires and would be approximately 2 1/2 feet wide at the base. Commissioner Lichty asked about the geographical area that this tower would serve and the possibility of sharing towers with other companies. Mr. Stuart stated that this tower would serve western Pulaski County: the Roland area, Yacht Club area, and western Highway 10 area. He stated that future towers would depend on growth and demand. He stated that his company could possibly share a tower if there was an existing tower. Commissioner Lichty stated that the towers are noticeable and addressed the co -location of towers. Darrell Walker, of AT&T, addressed the Commission regarding the co -location of towers and the benefits and detriments of co -location. Mr. Walker also stated that the tower design would change if more than one company located an antenna on it. Commissioner Hawn asked if this tower would be on the highest point on the Ludwig property. Mr. Walker stated that it would not. Commissioner Chachere asked about plans for development of the remainder of the one acre tract and about locating the tower in the center of the one acre tract and leaving the remainder of the one acre tract as a buffer. Gene Ludwig, property owner, stated that this would be acceptable to him. He also stated that he would be able to see the tower from his home. El November 14, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: z-6061 Commissioner Brandon asked if the tower would effect reception of radio, telephone, etc. Mr. Stuart stated that it would not. Jack Kearney, attorney for the Norwood Estate, spoke in opposition of the tower. He stated that the tower would hurt future development of the Norwood property. Commissioner Chachere asked if the Norwood Estate would be opposed to locating the tower in the center of the one acre tract with the remaining trees as a buffer. Mr. Kearney stated that the Estate would be opposed. Commissioner Woods asked if Mr. Grandison has had a change in opinion of the placement of the tower. Charles Grandison, representing the Norwood Estate, stated that his opinion has not changed. Commissioner Brandon commented on the location of roads and access to the property. Commissioner Lichty asked about the sale of the one acre tract to Mr. Ludwig. Mr. Ludwig stated that he bought the property in 1993 with no restrictions on the use of the property. Commissioner McCarthy asked when Cellular One approached Mr. Ludwig with this proposal. Mr. Stuart stated April 1995. Commissioners Putnam and McCarthy spoke with Mr. Grandison about locating the tower in the center of the one acre tract and leaving the remaining trees as a buffer. Mr. Grandison stated that he could not comment on a revised plan without first speaking to the rest of the Norwood family. Commissioner Woods stated that he questions if the tower is appropriate or not. Commissioner McCarthy commented on the tower location. Commissioner Chachere stated that any future changes in the property would come back before the Planning Commission. Commissioner McCarthy asked if this tower would be considered a utility easement. 5 November 14, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6061 Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated that it would not. All communications towers go through the conditional use process unless they are located on Industrial zoned property. Commissioner Ball asked how a conditional use permit is appealed. Mr. Carney stated that it could be appealed to the Board of Directors within 30 days. Commissioner Ball commented on the location of the tower in the center of the property. Commissioner Woods asked about a deferral in order for Mr. Grandison to consult the rest of his family. Mr. Stuart stated that he would ask for a vote today. Commissioner Brandon asked about the size of the structure at the base and any other structures. Mr. Walker stated that the tower is approximately 2 1/2 feet wide at the base and there would also be a small equipment building on the property. There would be a fence around the building and tower base. Commissioner Brandon asked if the equipment building and tower could be painted. Mr. Walker stated that they could. Ada Norwood, representing the Norwood Estate, arrived late and stated that she is opposed to relocation of the tower to the center of the one acre tract and leaving the trees. Commissioner Rahman asked how Cellular One decided on this site. Mr. Stuart stated that this was the only site in this area where the owner was agreeable to the tower placement. Several commissioners asked if the notices were sent to surrounding property owners in a timely manner. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, confirmed that they were sent in a timely manner. Mr. Carney stated that the County Tax Records are not always up-to-date. Mr. Stuart asked for a vote on his application. He stated that he would move the tower to the center of the property and leave the remaining trees as a buffer. November 14, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6061 The Chairman called on a vote to approve the conditional use permit subject to the tower being located in the center of the one acre tract and the remainder of the one acre tract being undisturbed and acting as a buffer to the surrounding properties. The conditional use permit was approved by a vote of 7 ayes, 3 nays and 1 absent. 7 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO • D FILE NO.: Z-6057 NAME: Central Arkansas Library - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: Northwest corner of Wright Avenue and Chester Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Central Arkansas Library Systems/ Ron Woods PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a library on this R-4 zoned site. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located at the northwest corner of Wright Avenue and Chester Street. 2. Compatibility with Neiahborhood: The proposed site is abutted by Wright Avenue to the south and Chester Street to the east. Immediately north of the site is the Dunbar Community Center and immediately west of the site is Dunbar School; all zoned R-4. Across Wright Avenue to the south existing uses include a bank, church, and gas station. Across Chester Street to the east existing uses include single family and multifamily residential structures. This proposal should have little impact on the surrounding neighborhood. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: The proposed library requires 22 on-site parking spaces. The applicant proposes 28 new on-site parking spaces. 4. Screening and Buffers: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The full buffer requirement along Chester Street is 7 1/2 feet and 14 feet along Wright Avenue. The plan submitted meets and exceeds these requirements. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6057 5. City Encrineer's Comments: Sidewalks are required on both streets with proper ramps. Minimum width is 4 feet or 5 feet at back of curb. 18th Street was closed by Ordinance 11,685. Stormwater detention analysis is required. Chester Street and Wright Avenue are minor arterials. Chester is currently 4 lane and has 60 feet of ROW. The MSP calls for 80 feet of ROW with 5 lanes. Wright Ave. is 3 lanes with a right-of-way width that is not shown on survey. The MSP requirements are the same as required for Chester. Conform to MSP requirements or seek waivers from the Board of Directors. Q 6. Utility Comments: Existing 6" sewer main located on site. Construction over or within five feet of existing sewer main is not allowed without permission from Little Rock Wastewater Utility. Contact the Utility for details. 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant requests a conditional use permit to allow a library on this R-4 zoned site. The applicant proposes to locate the library building at the northwest corner of Wright Avenue and Chester Street, with on-site parking north and west of the building. The new parking area to the west will be tied into the existing Dunbar School parking area. Access to the site will be gained by utilizing the existing driveway off of Chester Street. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the application subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances 2. Compliance with City Engineer Comments 3. Compliance with Utility Comments 4. Compliance with City's Sign Ordinance 2 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: D(Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6057 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 12, 1995) The applicant was not present. Staff presented the application. David Scherer, of Public Works, had a brief comment regarding the right-of-way required along Chester Street and Wright Avenue by the Master Street Plan. After a brief discussion, the Commission forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 1995) The applicant, Linda Bly of Central Arkansas Library Systems, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, with conditions. David Scherer, of Public Works, spoke briefly regarding the waiver request of right-of-way dedication and street improvements along Chester Street and Wright Avenue. Mr. Scherer stated that Public Works supports the waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements. He stated that the future plans are to downgrade the classification of both streets. Linda Bly addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mrs. Bly briefly discussed the proposed location of the library. The Chairman called for a vote on the application. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 nays, 3 abstentions and 3 absent. The item is automatically deferred to the December 12, 1995 Planning Commission agenda. Staff received a letter from Bobby Roberts of the Central Arkansas Library System (November 6, 1995) requesting that this item be heard by the Planning Commission before the December 12, 1995 meeting. As agreed to by the Planning Commission, as result of telephone poll conducted by Planning Staff on November 7, 1995, the Central Arkansas Library - Conditional Use Permit (Z-6057) was placed on the November 14, 1995 Planning Commission agenda as an addendum. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, with conditions. Staff also reminded the Commission that the applicant is requesting a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements to Chester Street and Wright Avenue. 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.:D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6057 David Scherer, of Public Works, gave a recommendation of approval of the waiver request and briefly discussed a Master Street Plan revision, the future downgrading of the classification of Chester Street and Wright Avenue. Commissioner Rahman asked about the church and the bank across the street from this proposed site. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated that the right-of-way was waived on the bank and the church sites. The Chairman called for a vote on the conditional use permit application. The conditional use permit was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 abstention (Commissioner Woods) and 1 absent. The Chairman called for a separate vote on the request for a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements to Chester Street and Wright Avenue. The Commission recommended approval of the waiver request by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 abstention (Commissioner woods) and 1 absent. r! November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4789-A Owner: Beck and Associates, under contract with William L. and Gypsy Dona Steel Applicant: Marion Scott Foster for White-Daters and Associates Location: 11801 Kanis Road; south side of Kanis Road, one block east of Bowman Road Request: Rezone from R-2 and MF -18 to C-3 Purpose: Unspecified commercial use Size: 8.8+ acres, R-2 and 3.4+ acres, MF -18; 12.2+ acres total Existing Use: The MF -18 property is vacant and wooded. One Single -Family residence is located on the R-2 property, most of which is heavily wooded. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant tracts, several Single -Family homes and a nonconforming plumbing contractor's office; all zoned R-2 South - New Office Warehouse development, partially complete; zoned PCD East - Single -Family residence and non -conforming upholstery shop; zoned R-2 West - Vacant tract; zoned C-3 and non -conforming ice/roller skating rink; zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Dedicate right-of-way per Master Street Plan, 45 feet from centerline. With construction 1/2 of minor arterial standard street construction will be required. All drainage structures that cross the roadway shall be evaluated and 100% reconstructed, if found to be deficient. Stormwater detention analysis will be required. Sidewalks and driveways shall conform to ordinance. A drainage easement may be required for drainage piping. A grading permit and ADPL&E permit are required prior to any construction. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4789-A (Cont.) LAND USE ELEMENT The site in question is located in the I-430 District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial along Kanis and Multifamily south of that. The request is for Commercial which is in conflict with the Plan. Staff cannot support a change to this degree at this time. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this 12.2± acre tract from R-2 and MF -18 to C-3. The majority of the site is vacant and wooded, although one single family residence is located on the R-2 zoned property. No specific development or use has been proposed for the site at this time. The I-430 District Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial for the Kanis Road frontage and Multifamily south of that. The Mixed Office Commercial designation applies to both the north and south sides of Kanis Road, from Autumn to Bowman Roads. The Mixed Office and Commercial Land Use category provides for a mixture of Office and Commercial uses to occur. A Planned Unit Development is recommended if the use is entirely commercial or if the use is a mixture of office and commercial. The Multifamily Residential Land Use category accommodates residential development of 10 to 36 dwelling units per acre. The proposed reclassification of this 12.2+ acres to C-3, general commercial is in conflict with the Plan and will contribute to the stripping out of Kanis Road with commercial zoning. This action could negatively impact the adopted Land Use Plan and the Kanis Road traffic pattern. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the C-3 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) Joe White was present representing the applicant. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had amended the application to 0-3. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated that staff supported the amended 0-3 request. Mr. Carney recommended approval of 0-3 and an amendment to the I-430 District Land Use Plan to reflect Mixed Office and Commercial for this site. 2 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4789-A (Cont.) A motion was made to approve the application as amended to 0-3. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. The proposed amendment to the I-430 District Land Use Elan, as recommended by staff, was presented for a vote. The amendment was also approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. Q November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 2 Z -5452-A Owner: Applicant: Elijah Hampton Elijah Hampton Location: 2322 Bragg Street; northwest corner of East 24th Street and Bragg Street (I-30 Frontage Road) Request: Rezone from R-4 to 0-1 Purpose: Office use Size: .15± acres Existing Use: Frame residential structure currently classified as "unsafe and vacant" by Housing Code Enforcement Office SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family residence; zoned R-4 and Vacant lot; zoned 0-1 South - Office and Commercial uses, zoned I-2 and old VA Hospital site; zoned PCD and R-4 East - I-30 Right -Of -way West - Vacant lot; zoned R-4 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Dedicate 5 feet of right-of-way for East 24th to bring to commercial street right-of-way standard. Dedicate a 20 foot radial area at the intersection of Bragg and East 24th. Other ordinance requirements will be discussed at time of permit, if plans include expansion or construction. Off- street parking with access to 24th and AHTD permit for work in I-30 Right -Of -Way will be required. LAND USE ELEMENT The site in question is located in the Central City District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is for Quiet Office. There is an existing 110-1" parcel to the north and since these lots front onto the interstate, Staff is willing to consider alternative uses. A Mixed Use classification would allow November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 2 Z -5452-A (Cont.) nonresidential uses as long as they are in keeping with a single family character. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .15± acre lot from R-4 to 0-1 for an unspecified office use. The property consists of a typical residential lot occupied by a single story, frame residential structure which is in extreme disrepair. The structure has been classified as "unsafe and vacant" by the City's Housing Code Enforcement staff. The property is located at the extreme southeast perimeter of a large residential neighborhood which extends to the north and west. The I-30 Right -Of -Way abuts this property on the east and the property actually fronts on the interstate frontage Road at the Roosevelt Road exit. Across 24th Street, to the south, is a large area of nonresidential uses and zoning ranging from PCD to I-2. It is the applicant's contention that the structure is beyond the point where it is financially feasible to repair it for continued residential use. He proposes to zone it 0- 1 which would allow the property to be used for an office. Staff is unclear if the applicant proposes to convert the existing structure into an office or remove it and construct a new building. The area standards provided in the 0-1 Quiet Office district anticipate that office uses will be located in established areas of the city and in close proximity to apartments and other residential uses. Height, area and off-street parking regulations are designed to assure that office uses will be compatible with adjacent residential uses, The Central City District Land Use Plan reflects the existing use and recommends single family for the site. There is an 110-1" site one lot north of this property and since these lots front onto the interstate, staff is willing to consider alternative uses. A change in the Plan from residential to mixed use would allow nonresidential uses as long as they are in keeping with a single family character, Staff believes the 0-1 reclassification to be a reasonable request for this site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested 0-1 zoning and of an amendment to the Central City District Land Use Plan to mixed use for this site. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 2 Z -5452-A (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had not mailed the required notices and recommended that the item be deferred to the January 2, 1996 Commission meeting. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the January 2, 1996 Commission meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstaining (Chachere). 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6063 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Kenny Goodwin Kenny Goodwin 301 East Roosevelt Road Rezone from C-3 to C-4 Vehicle Sales Lot .32 acres Food Store SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Old VA Hospital site; zoned PCD and Single -Family residence; zoned R-5 South - Vacant, zoned R-3 East - Car Wash, zoned C-3 West - Housing Authority Offices and Shops, zoned C-3 ENGINEERING COMMENTS Confirm that 70 feet of right-of-way exists for Roosevelt; if deficient, dedicate right-of-way. Cumberland right-of- way does not appear to exist, this street is not on city maps or on Master Street Plan. ROW on 26th appears to be adequate. With construction, sidewalks will be required on both Roosevelt and 26th Street and improvements to 26th may be required. AHTD permits will be required prior to construction in the Roosevelt ROW. Traffic Engineering requests: 1. Eliminate all parking in right-of-way. 2. Pave gravel parking area. 3. Current access to Roosevelt is inadequate and will require reconstruction. 4. 12 foot driveway shall be reconstructed to 18 feet. 5. Widen Roosevelt to 24 feet from centerline with construction. LAND USE ELEMENT The site in question is located in the Central City District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6063 (Cont.) Commercial. The request is for "C-4." A °'C-41, classification neither meets the letter nor spirit of the land use classification. Staff cannot recommend amending the plan at this time. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .32± acre site from C-3 to C-4 to accommodate a vehicle sales lot. The site consists of two lots, one of which fronts on Roosevelt road and one which fronts on East 26th Street. The property is occupied by a 2,745+ square foot, brick structure containing a neighborhood grocery store. The building has only a 4.3± foot setback from the Roosevelt Road property line and customer parking now occurs in the Roosevelt Road right-of-way. An area of gravel parking is adjacent to the west side of the building. The property slopes severely from Roosevelt Road down to East 26th Street. The southern half of the site, which fronts on to East 26th Street, is mostly overgrown and unused. The applicant requests the reclassification of the property from C-3, General Commercial to C-4, Open Display District to allow a vehicle sales lot. The applicant has not indicated if the vehicle sales lot is to replace the existing food store or if the sale of vehicles is to take place on the site along with the existing food store. The Central City District Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial for the site. This land use category provides for a mixture of office and commercial uses to occur. A Planned Unit Development is recommended if the use is entirely commercial or if the use is a mixture of Office and Commercial. The requested C-4 reclassification meets neither the letter nor spirit of the land use classification. The C-4 Open Display District development criteria restricts any open display of any kind whatsoever in the first 20 feet of the required 45 foot front yard setback. Due to the location of the existing building and the availability of area on the site for the display of vehicles, it would appear that the vehicles would have to be displayed primarily behind the building. This would put the predominance of the proposed car lot directly across East 26th Street from the residential neighborhood to the south. The C-4 request does not conform to the adopted Land Use Plan and staff cannot support a C-4 request at this site. 2 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6063 (Cont.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the C-4 zoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicant, Kenny Goodwin, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial of the C-4 request. Mr. Goodwin addressed the Commission and discussed his plans for development of the property. He stated that he wished to construct a parking lot on the south side of the property and to display a small number of vehicles on the west side of the building. He stated that no additional structures would be built on the site. Mr. Goodwin stated that the grocery store would continue to occupy the upper floor of the existing building and that the office for the car sales business would also be located on this portion of the building. He stated that he hoped to put a restaurant in the lower level. Mr. Goodwin then handed out a written development proposal for the site. Commissioner Daniel suggested that the item should be deferred to allow the applicant to discuss his specific development plans with staff. Commissioner Woods stated that he did not believe the site could support all of the proposed uses. He questioned the availability of adequate parking. Mr. Goodwin stated that the office would be for more of an automobile brokerage business; that state law required an automobile broker to have an office. He stated that cars would be kept at an auction yard. In response to a question from Commissioner Lichty, Mr. Goodwin stated that cars would be displayed on Lot 6 (the lot behind the building). Mr. Goodwin then stated that customer parking would be located behind the store and that vehicle display would be located west of the building. Commissioner Putnam asked the City Attorney present if the state law requiring automobile dealers to have a sales lot actually required that cars sales take place from the lot or if there could be only an office at the location. Cindy Dawson, of the City Attorney's Office, responded that she was unsure. Richard Wood, of the Planning Staff, stated that the City had an agreement with the State Police whereby the state 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6063 (Cont. requires car dealers to have a business location on commercial property. Mr. Wood stated that Mr. Goodwin could have only an office on the site and keep the used cars elsewhere. Mr. Wood stated that Mr. Goodwin could not park cars or display a car lot sign on the property. Acting Chairman Ball asked if there would be a problem if Mr. Goodwin had "purely an office use" on the site for his automobile brokerage business. Mr. Wood responded that the office would be allowed. Commissioner Rahman stated that he understood that Mr. Goodwin could conduct all of the uses he proposed (car brokerage office only, grocery store and restaurant) on the C-3 property as it is. Staff confirmed that those uses were allowed as long as Mr. Goodwin did not display any cars on the property. Acting Chairman Ball stated that Mr. Goodwin had indicated a desire to display cars on the site, to the west of the building. Mr. Goodwin stated that it was his desire to comply with all city codes. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, Mr. Goodwin stated that he did not intend to display cars on the site, only to have a sign identifying the property as his car lot. He then stated that he would be driving a vehicle to and from the site. In response to a question from Acting Chairman Ball, Mr. Goodwin stated that he would be buying and selling cars at the auction. Mr. wood stated that it would be virtually impossible to enforce a situation where a property is identified as a car lot but not allowed to have vehicles displayed for sale. He stated that enforcement staff could not tell which vehicles are displayed for sale and which vehicles belong to customers of the grocery store and proposed restaurant. Commissioner Lichty stated that there was also a problem with the multiple uses proposed on the site; primarily the car sales. Acting Chairman Ball stated that the real issue was a land use question regarding the proposed C-4 zoning. He then stated that he felt there had been adequate discussion of the item. 4 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z-6063 (Cont.) Commissioner Chachere questioned whether it might be possible to approach the matter as a PUD with limits on vehicle sales. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that a PUD could address such issues as the mixture of uses proposed and limitations on vehicle display. He stated that staff would still be opposed to vehicle sales, a C-4 use, on the site. In response to a question from Commissioner Chachere, Mr. Carney stated that staff had not seen the site plan and development plan presented by Mr. Goodwin. There was a brief discussion of the proposed site plan. Mr. Goodwin stated that he was willing to meet with staff and to amend his application to a PUD. A motion was made to defer the item to the December 12, 1995 Commission meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. 5 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 4 Z-6064 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: David Austin David Austin 7610 Stagecoach Road Rezone from R-2 to 0-1 Office for Austin Construction, Inc. 1.5 acres Frame, Single -Family residence SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family residence, zoned R-2 South - Single -Family residence, zoned R-2 East - Vacant tract and Single -Family residence, zoned R-2 West - I-430 Right -Of -Way ENGINEERING COMMENTS Stagecoach is a principal arterial on the Master Street Plan. The Right-of-way should be 110 feet or 55 feet from centerline. Dedicate right-of-way as required. With Construction, construct 1/2 of the 60 foot principal arterial or contribute In -Lieu fees for this construction, Sidewalks and driveways shall conform to ordinance. A stormwater detention plan is required. AHTD approval of any construction in the ROW will be required. Minimum finish floor elevation is 283.00 NGVD and grading and SFHA development permits are required prior to any construction. Paved off street parking will be required with a minimum driveway width of 24 feet, LAND USE ELEMENT The site in question is located in the Crystal Valley District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family. The request is for Quiet Office use. When the land use plan for this area was adopted, it did not allow for any new nonresidential use along Stagecoach from I-430 to Asher. Most, but not all, of the existing commercial use was recognized. Staff does wish to protect the existing single , November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 4 Z-6064 (Cont.) family development and prevent the stripping out of Stagecoach. However, using McHenry Creek as a dividing line, Staff would recommend considering alternative development between McHenry Creek and I-430. At the interchange commercial use should be added north of Stagecoach. The remaining area to McHenry Creek should be classified Mixed Use. This classification is recommended rather then Transition Zone to favor Single Family. Any nonresidential use approved within the proposed Mixed Use area must keep the residential character of Stagecoach Road in tact. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this 1.5 acre tract from R-2 to 0-1 to allow for the use of the site as an office for Austin Construction, Inc. The site is currently occupied by a single story, frame residential structure, The applicant proposes to convert this structure into an office for his construction company. He has been advised that the 0-1 classification will allow for the use of the property as an office only and that no storage of contractor's equipment or materials will be permitted on the site under the 0-1 zoning classification. The Crystal valley District Land Use Plan recommends Single Family for this area, although there are nonresidential uses on this side of Stagecoach Road between McHenry Creek and I-430. Staff does want to protect the predominately residential nature of this area but believes it would be reasonable to consider alternative development between McHenry Creek and the Stagecoach Road/I-430 Interchange. Amending the Plan to commercial at the northeast corner of I-430 and Stagecoach would recognize the existing commercial use and would compliment the commercial shown on the Plan at the southeast corner. The remaining properties along Stagecoach, from I-430 to McHenry Creek should be classified Mixed Use on the Plan. This would involve a small number of properties, including two owned by the applicant and a nearby day care center. The Mixed Use category provides for a mixture of residential, office and commercial uses. The 0-1 height, area and off-street parking regulations are designed to assure that office uses will be compatible with adjacent residential districts. Staff believes the 0-1 reclassification to be a reasonable request for this property. K November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 4 Z-6064 (Cont.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested 0-1 zoning. Staff also recommends approval of an amendment to the Crystal Valley District Land Use Plana adding Commercial on the north side of Stagecoach just east of I-430 and classifying the remaining area to McHenry Creek as Mixed Use. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicant, David Austin, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval of 0-1 and an amendment to the I-430 District Land Use Plan. The 0-1 zoning request and the proposed Land Use Plan amendment were placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstaining (Chachere). 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 5 Z-6069 Owner: Victory Outreach Church Applicant: Mario Chavez Location: 3229 Mary Street Request: Rezone from R-3 to R-5 Purpose: Utilize existing structure as a rooming, lodging and boarding facility. Size: .32± acres Existing Use: Double lot occupied by a split-level, frame residential structure SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single -Family residence, zoned R-3 South - Lumber Company, zoned C-3 East - Lumber storage yard and Single -Family residence, zoned I-2 West - Large apartment development, zoned PRD ENGINEERING COMMENTS Both streets appear to have right-of-way that is 20 feet from centerline. The right-of-way required is 30 feet from centerline due to the multifamily zoning. A 20 foot radial dedication is required at the intersection. The streets are less than minimum residential standards; they are 20 feet in width and have open ditches. Recommend widening the streets and making sidewalk and driveway improvements to conform to City ordinances (currently no sidewalks exist and the driveway is gravel). Provide off street paved parking. LAND USE ELEMENT The site in question is located in the I-630 District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Industrial. The request is for Multifamily. The Plan uses Mary Street as the dividing line between Multifamily and Industrial. Due to the dissimilar needs and characteristics between multifamily and industrial using a local street as a dividing line is not desirable. A more logical dividing line between the uses would be an alley (backyard - relationship). Since all the November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 5 Z-6069 (Cont.) parcels north of Brack Street and east of Mary Street are still zoned "R-3" Single Family it is not too late to move the land use boundary to the current zoning boundary, the alley between Mary Street and Carl Street. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .32 acre tract from R-3 to R-5 to allow for the use of the existing structure as a rooming, lodging and boarding facility. The property consists of two adjacent lots, one of which is occupied by a split-level, frame residential structure. The applicant proposes to convert the structure into a rooming, lodging and boarding facility which is defined by the Ordinance as "a building or establishment which provides for more than four (4) but fewer than sixteen (16) persons and may provide meal service. The building shall be arranged as to permit passage between all living elements such as dining, kitchen and bathrooms. Detached units or private access accommodations are not permitted.,, The site is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses ranging from R-3 zoned Single Family homes to I-2 zoned Lumber Yards and Warehouse Facilities. A large, multifamily complex is located directly across Mary Street to the west. The property is one of only 3-4 residential properties in a small pocket north of Brack Street and east of Mary Street. The R-5 district is established to provide for high density residential uses and the conversion of existing residential structures. The district may be used as a transitional or buffer zone between lower -density residential districts and nonresidential development. It would appear that this property is appropriate to be rezoned R-5. The I-630 District Land Use Plan currently recommends Industrial for this site. Mary Street serves as the dividing line between Industrial and Multifamily. Since those properties north of Brack and east of Mary are still residential, it is not to late to move the land use boundary to the alley, half a block east of Mary Street. If the R-5 zoning is approved by the Commission and the Board of Directors, the applicant needs to be aware that there are certain code requirements which must be met if the structure is converted to a rooming, lodging and boarding facilities. These include, but are not limited to, providing proper on-site parking and bringing the structure into compliance with building codes regarding this type of occupancy. 2 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 5 Z-6069 (Cont.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the R-5 zoning request. Staff also recommends approval of an amendment to the I-630 District Land Use Plan, moving the land use boundary separating Multifamily and Industrial one-half block east, to the alley behind this property. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 149 1995) The applicant, Mario Chavez, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval of R-5 and an amendment to the I-630 District Land Use Plan. The R-5 zoning request and the proposed Land Use Plan amendment were placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstaining (Chachere). 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: G-23-242 Name• Location• Owner/Applicant: Request• STAFF REVIEW: Block 8, Pope's Addition Alley Right -of -Way Abandonment Block bounded by East Markham, East 2nd, Rock and Commerce Streets Various Owners by Central Arkansas Library System To abandon the southern portion of the north/south alley and the western portion of the east/west alley to be incorporated into a parking lot development proposed for the new library across Rock Street. 1. Public Need for this Right -of -Way There is no public need for these portions of unused alley rights-of-way. 2. Master Street Plan The Master Street Plan reflects no need for these alley rights-of-way. 3. Need for Right -of -Way on Adiacent Streets There is no need for right-of-way on adjacent streets. The adjacent block of Rock Street right-of-way was previously abandoned by the City. 4. Characteristics of Right -of -Way Terrain The east/west alley is overgrown and impassable. It contains the remnants of an old railroad spur. The north/south alley is gravel covered and indistinguishable from the adjacent gravel parking lots. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO • G-23-242 5. Development Potential Once abandoned, the area of these alleys will be incorporated into a parking lot to serve the proposed new library which will be located across Rock Street. 6. Neighborhood Land Use and Effect The area contains a variety of uses which are primarily commercial and industrial in nature, ranging from furniture sales to wholesale and warehousing. The proposed new Central Arkansas Library System's main facility is to be located directly across Rock Street to the east. One alley is impassable and the other serves to access the property proposed for development as the library parking lot. Abandoning these alley rights-of-way will have no effect on the neighborhood. 7. Neighborhood Position No neighborhood position has been voiced. All abutting property owners have signed the petition for abandonment. 8 Effect on Public Services or Utilities There will be no effect on public services or utilities. The rights-of-way will be retained as utility and drainage easements. The alleys are not presently in use. 9. Reversionary Rights All reversionary rights will extend to adjacent property owners. 10. Public Welfare and Safetv Issues Abandoning these alley rights-of-way will not affect the public welfare and safety. It will allow for the development of a parking lot to serve the proposed new Central Arkansas Library. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the abandonment of these alley rights-of-way subject to the area of the abandoned rights- of-way being retained as a utility and drainage easement. November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-242 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) Bobby Roberts was present representing the Central Arkansas Library System. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to the area of the abandoned right-of-way being retained as a utility and drainage easement. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 4 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstaining (Chachere). 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-6080 NAME: HUNT -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: At the southwest corner of Kavanaugh Blvd. and N. Jackson St., at 3201 Kavanaugh Blvd. DEVELOPER• ELLA CAROL HUNT 411 N. Jackson St. Little Rock, AR 72205 666-4787 AREA: 0.07 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Beauty Shop, Residence, Office PLANNING DISTRICT: 4 CENSUS TRACT: 15 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: Proposed is a Planned Development to permit the use of the main and upper (Kavanaugh Blvd. -fronting) levels of an existing residential structure as a "spa" and the continued use of the downstairs (Jackson St. -fronting) apartment for residential use. The main floor is to include space for a waiting room, hair -stylist area, sitting massage area for manicures and pedicures, and hair and body care products sales; the upper floor is to have space for massage therapy, an aromatherapy steam room, a wet spa room for seaweed body mask and herbal flower mists, and for facials. Requested as an alternate use is approval for the use of the downstairs apartment area, as well as the upper floor area, for office space. The applicant anticipates having herself and four employees in the operation of the "spa", plus having a tenant in the apartment. Requested is approval: a) to add a deck off the upper level for a gardening area and to provide a needed exit; and, b) to add a screened porch off the west side of the structure for use as a steam room and hot tub area, and a tea room for spa clients. The hours of operation are, initially, to be from 10:00 AM to 6:30 PM, Mondays through Saturdays, with, eventually, the hours November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 Z-6080 (Cont_.. extending to 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM. Employees are to work in shifts, with half working at any one time. Parking is to be "on -street", but employees will not be permitted to park on the street immediately around the subject property. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Planning Commission review and a recommendation for approval to the Board of Directors is requested for a Planned Commercial Development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is the north one-half of what was once a full City lot. The structure which is proposed to be used is a three-story home, with approximately 680 square feet per floor, or 2940 square feet total. The site slopes downward from Kavanaugh Blvd., so the main "at grade" entrance to the home is located on Kavanaugh Blvd., with the lower level of the home being "below grade" on the Kavanaugh Blvd. side, but having an "at - grade" entrance on the N. Jackson St. face. There is a driveway off Kavanaugh Blvd. and one off N. Jackson St. The current zoning of the site is R-2. The R-2 zoning district extends to the abutting property to the south and west, and to the property across N. Jackson St. to the east. To the north, across Kavanaugh Blvd., to the northeast, is an R-4 zoned tract; to the northwest, is the Mount St. Mary's campus, which is a conditional use in an R-2 zoned area. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comments that there is a sight distance problem for traffic turning onto Kavanaugh Blvd. from N. Jackson St., and that there is insufficient land available on the lot to construct proper off-street parking with driveways which conform to City ordinances. Little Rock Water Works approved the submittal. Little Rock Wastewater Utility approved the submittal. Arkansas Power and Light Co. approved the submittal. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. did not provide comments. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. approved the submittal. The Fire Department did not provide comments. K November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 Z-6080 (Cont.) D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Sec. 36-502 requires, for "personal service" establishments, 1 off-street parking space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area; for general business and retail sales, 1 space for each 300 square feet; and for professional and business office, 1 space for each 400 square feet. A residential use requires 1.5 spaces. Required off-street parking, then, could range from a minimum of 7 spaces to at least 10 spaces, depending on the use mix. A garage and two driveways are provided, for a total of 4 available spaces; 1 space behind the other in each driveway; none having the required off-street maneuvering space for a turn- around. The alternative uses which are requested are for "office" uses. Generally, office uses includes all uses listed in the 0-1, 0-2, and 0-3 zoning districts, and this can include anything from professional offices, to funeral homes, to daycare facilities. The applicant needs to specify what she means by "office" uses as alternative uses of the site. The applicant should consult with the Building Codes Division to determine what building -related codes will impact the conversion of the building to the proposed uses. The size of the proposed deck and screened porch additions need to be specified. Signage and site lighting need to be specified by the applicant. The Neighborhoods and Planning Site Plan Review Specialist comments that a 6 foot high opaque wood fence, with its face directed outward or with slats on both sides, is requred along the west and south property lines. Unless otherwise present, 2 trees or tree -form crape myrtles of 21° caliper are required to be planted within the back yard. E. ANALYSIS: The Planning staff reports that the subject site is located in the Heights/Hillcrest District, and that the adopted Land Use Plan shows "Single -Family" uses for the site. Since the request is for commercial use, staff cannot support a change in the Plan for this location at this time. Public Works notes the lack of off-street parking and the potential traffic hazard of increased traffic at 3 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 Z-6080 (Cont.) the Kavanaugh Blvd. -N. Jackson St. intersection. The possible locations of off-street parking are both insufficient to provide the needed number of spaces, and do not have area available to provide the required off-street maneuvering space. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the Planned Development. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 12, 1995) Ms. Ella Carol Hunt, the applicant was present. Staff outlined the nature of the requested Planned Development, and reported that, because of the short time period between the applicant filing the application and the Subdivision Committee meeting, there were no comments available from utilities or City departments. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) Staff presented the item, noting that staff had delivered to Commission members copies of letters concerning the proposed PCD that had been received, both in support of and in opposition to the application. Staff related that the staff recommendation is for denial of the PCD application, noting that the proposal is in conflict with the Land Use Plan and that no off-street parking is proposed. Ms. Ella Hunt, the applicant, related that the home which she proposes to use for her spa is an 1,857 square foot, three-level home. She said that the lowest level, the level opening to Jackson St., would remain a residential use. The ground level opening to Kavanaugh, she said, would be used for her office and for the hair services she offers, as well as for manicures and pedicures. The upper level would, she continued, be used for facials and massage services. She reported that, based on the actual square footage of the residence, the Ordinance will require 7 parking spaces. She explained that she proposes a "day spa", where clients come for extended services. She said that, from the original application, the hours would be more restricted, so that the residential uses abutting the site would not be affected. She said that she would have four employees, and that, on an average, there would be four clients per hour; at the most, 21 clients per day. Based on this anticipated client load, she said that she would anticipate needing no more than 5 4 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 Z-6080(Cont. parking spaces for clients. Employees, she said, would not be permitted to park on site. She has, she explained, made arrangements for leased parking spaces in the neighborhood, within a block and a block and a half, and employees would be required to use these leased spaces. She said that she would have a limousine service available for clients, further limiting the need for parking. Additionally, she would provide valet parking to clients, with clients' vehicles being parked in leased spaces away from the site. She reported that all deliveries would be made to the "Mail Boxes, Etc." address. She presented a survey of available parking in the area, and said that, on a regular basis, there is a lot of available parking within a short walk from the site. She said that she has a total of 3 parking spaces on site, with one space off Jackson St. and 2 off Kavanaugh. She said that the Kavanaugh drive is overly wide, and that there is enough room for a backing movement within its width to permit a car to turn around and head out, instead of backing out onto Kavanaugh, plus a space for stacked parking. Staff responded to the parking proposal by stating that none of the Hillcrest businesses have excess parking which would allow them to lease out parking for another business' use. Ms. Lynne Haubenreich spoke in support of the application. She said that she both lived in the neighborhood and owned a business in the neighborhood, and that Ms. Hunt's proposed business would be both an asset to the area and would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. She expressed fear that the property would become rental property, and that its condition would deteriorate. Ms. Brenda Kennett spoke in support of the application. She said she is a long-time resident and property owner in the Hillcrest area. She pointed out that the area of the proposed spa is primarily a business area, beginning, she said, with the cleaners at the corner, and continuing all the way up through the Hillcrest business area. Mr. Bill Rector spoke in support of the application. He stated that he has no financial interest in the application; that he is not involved as a real estate agent in the matter. He said that Ms. Hunt is a friend of his. He pointed out that, when the subject residence was built, Kavanaugh probably had trolley cars on it, and that the character of the uses along Kavanaugh has changed since then. It is, he said, an area in transition. He said that either Ms. Hunt's use can be approved, which will maintain the character of the types of uses in Hillcrest, or it will probably become a rent house. It is not, he said, still viable as an owner -occupied residence. A well -thought-out 5 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 Z-6080 (Cont.) commercial use is, on the other hand, the best use for the neighborhood. 4 Mr. Roy Dudley spoke in support of the application. He said that he had knows Ms. Hunt for a number of years, and was certain that her business would be one of which Hillcrest residents could be proud. Ms. Jennifer Rector spoke in support of the application. She said that she had know the applicant for over 25 years, and had known her to almost obsessive about her environment. She related that the applicant had gone to the rain forest to gain knowledge about environment issues. When she lived downtown, Ms. Rector continued, the applicant had build a rose garden which was featured in the newspaper. The house the applicant is currently living in, Ms. Rector added, Ms. Hunt has turned into a "small paradise". The applicant, she said, has done a beautiful job in renovating the house she is currently living in, and, she said, she was sure that Ms. Hunt would do the same outstanding job of maintaining the Kavanaugh and Jackson house for her business. She said that, if the house is turned into a rental unit, not only will it not be maintained as well, but parking will even be a worse problem. Commissioner Lichty interjected that rental property in Hillcrest can go at a premium, and that the problem may be with who rents a piece of property, not necessarily that it is rental property. Mr. Rector explained that the subject property, because of where it is (next to a commercial use, next to a piece of rental property that is not maintained well, across the street from a school, and in an area that is in transition), is not as likely to be a rental property that will go at a premium. Commissioner Lichty responded that he was concerned about extending the commercial node at the Kavanaugh -Van Buren intersection another block east, and adding to the already existing traffic problem at this intersection. Ms. Mary Delores Longinotti, noting that she was speaking for Gail and Charles Batson, who live in the neighborhood, as well as a number of other neighbors, and her husband and herself, spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. She said that she and her neighbors had opposed commercialization of the neighborhood for many years, and that she feared that parking would be a problem. Mrs. Stratton spoke in opposition to the proposal. She related that she was representing her family at the hearing, and that she lived in the house next door to the subject 11 November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 7 Z-6080 (Cont.) property in the house that had been described as "dilapidated" by other speakers. She said that any increase in traffic would increase an already hazardous situation. Mr. Bo Montgomery spoke in opposition to the proposal. He said that the area is a strong residential neighborhood, and he opposed any erosion of its character. He said that any increase in traffic or parking would add to the already bad problem. Ms. Karen Derrick Coleman, saying that she lived immediately next door to the subject property, spoke in opposition to the proposal. She said that there is no extra parking in the area. Commissioner Hawn noted that he did not see in Ms. Hunt's proposal a solution to the parking problem. Commissioner McCarthy asked for clarification from Ms. Hunt that the residential character of the house was to be retained. Ms. Hunt affirmed that it would; that the only major renovation project will be to make a restroom handicap accessible. The question was called, and the motion approval of the PCD failed with the vote and 2 absent. 7 to recommend of 2 ayes, 7 nays, November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-6071 Name: Location: Owner/Applicant: Proposal: STAFF ANALYSIS• Williams Day -Care Family Home Special Use Permit 9531 Woodford Drive Martha Williams, Cristie Williams A special use permit is requested to allow the occupant of 9531 Woodford Drive to operate a day care family home. The property is zoned R-2. The general purpose of Section 36-54 states: "Special use permits provide a method of control over certain types of land uses which, while not requiring the full review process of the conditional use permits, do require some review procedure which allows for determination of their appropriateness within the neighborhood for which they are proposed and for public comment." These uses include bed and breakfast hotels, family care facilities and day care family homes. The site and location criteria established by the Zoning Ordinance for day care family homes are as follow: a. This use may be located only in a single-family home, occupied by the care giver. b. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of Arkansas. C. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers. d. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from households other than the care givers. e. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care centers are not allowed by right. Separation spacing requirements for family care facilities will be determined by the planning commission so as not to November 14, 1995 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6071 adversely impact the surrounding properties and neighborhood. Issues that the planning commission will consider during its review include: (1) The total number of similar facilities and their spacing within the neighborhood. (2) Existing zoning and land use patterns. (3) Area wide availability of facilities providing like services. (4) Provision for readily accessible public or quasi -public transportation. 9531 Woodford is located at the southern fringe of a single family residential neighborhood. All surrounding properties are zoned R-2, Single Family. The property backs up to the main line of the MoPac railroad. The site consists of a single story residential structure which is typical of structures in the neighborhood. The property has a back yard enclosed by a chain-link fence which provides adequate play area. The site also contains a paved driveway with room for two vehicles. The primary use of the property will remain single family residential. No signage beyond that allowed in single family zones will be permitted. The applicant has received a license from the childcare licensing division of the State Department of Human Services limiting her to keeping no more than 10 children. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the special use permit to allow a day care family home. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 14, 1995) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the site and location criteria established for day care family homes in Section 36-54 of Rezoning Ordinance. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstaining (Chachere). 2 PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR - 1996 REZONING HEARINGS: Filing Date Legal Ad 11-20-95 01-08-96 02-16-96 04-01-96 05-13-96 06-24-96 08-05-96 09-16-96 10-28-96 12-09-96 12-01-95 01-19-96 03-01-96 04-12-96 05-24-96 07-05-96 08-16-96 09-27-96 11-08-96 12-20-96 SUBDIVISION HEARING: ADOPTED: Hearing Date (1) 01-02-96 02-13-96 03-26-96 05-07-96 06-18-96 07-30-96 09-10-96 10-22-96 12-03-96 01-21-97 PLANNING HEARINGS: Legal Ad Hearing Date (1) 12-22-95 01-16-96 Subdivision (2) Hearing (1) Filing Date Legal Ad Committee Date 12-18-95 12-29-95 01-04-96 01-30-96 02-05-96 02-16-96 02-22-96 03-12-96 03-18-96 03-29-96 04-04-96 04-23-96 04-29-96 05-10-96 05-16-96 06-04-96 06-10-96 06-21-96 06-27-96 07-16-96 07-22-96 08-02-96 08-08-96 08-27-96 08-30-96 09-13-96 09-19-96 10-08-96 10-14-96 10-25-96 10-31-96 11-19-96 11-25-96 12-06-96 12-12-96 01-07-97 01-13-97 01-24-97 01-30-97 02-18-97 PLANNING HEARINGS: Legal Ad Hearing Date (1) 12-22-95 01-16-96 02-02-96 02-27-96 03-15-96 04-09-96 04-26-96 05-21-96 06-07-96 07-02-96 07-19-96 08-13-96 08-30-96 09-24-96 10-11-96 11-05-96 11-22-96 12-17-96 01-10-97 02-04-97 NOTE: (1) All Public Hearings shall be held at 9:00 A.M. Unless otherwise changed by the Commission. (2) All meetings shall be held at 1:00 P. M. unless changed by the Subdivision Committee. NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON REQUEST. REQUEST SHOULD BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND PLANNING AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. 0 0 W cr-. W Z �I �z Ow U 'n 0-7 Z_ V Z p Q1. LU Q m Ci z w U) m Q LJ Q z V �1 co 7, Qn Lij z w Q z z} LU v L>- F CON_pM ZC 4C LLQ Cr Z= } - d m = T W Ci=0CL'¢JUQU}- ` 2 J U z U S Z UU H 0 W Q2�U44 0� `C m Ci z w U) m Q LJ Q z V �1 m Ci z w U) m Q LJ Q z V November 14, 1995 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 1:35 p.m. Date k , Y' Chairman