Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_01 24 1995LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING MINUTE RECORD JANUARY 24, 1995 12:30 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eight (8) in numbers II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The minutes of the December 13, 1994 meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Brad Walker Pam Adcock Ramsay Ball Doyle Daniel Bill Putnam Mizan Rahman Joe Selz Emmett Willis Suzanne McCarthy the roll call) Diane Chachere Ron Woods City Attorney: Stephen Giles (arrived after LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING HEARING AGENDA JANUARY 24, 1995 I. DEFERRED ITEMS A. Z- 4461 -A 9125 Sibley Hole Road R -2 to I -2 B. Z -5896 Black Rd. and Piggee St. R -2 to R -2 C. Z- 4431 -C Hwy. 10 at Taylor Loop R -2 to C -3 D. The Village of Chenal (Z -5936) II. REZONING ITEMS 1. Z -5925 8624 Asher Ave. C -3 to C -4 2. Z -5926 9222 Stagecoach Road R -2 to C -4 3. Z -5930 3200 Baseline Road R -2 to I -2 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO. A Z- 4461 -A Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Harold and Evelyn Williams Harold Williams 9100 Block of Sibley Hole Road Rezone from R -2 to I -2 Industrial 3.92 acres Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, zoned R -2 South - Single - Family and Office, zoned R -2 and 0-3 East - Vacant, zoned R -2 West - Vacant, zoned R -2 STAFF ANALYSIS, The property in question is located between I -30 and Baseline Road, and the request is to rezone approximately 4 acres from R -2 to I -2. The owner has indicated that he has been approached by an individual who is interested in purchasing the property for a light manufacturing use. At this time, the site is undeveloped and has several trees on it. The land is situated on the east side of Sibley Hole and about midway between Baseline and the I -30 frontage road. The acreage has 208 feet along Sibley Hole Road and a depth of 822 feet. Zoning in the general vicinity is R -2, 0-3, C -4 and I -2, with the property abutting R -2 and 0-3 land. The most recent rezoning action in the area was the approval of the 0-3 for the parcel directly to the south. The existing I -2 is north of Baseline Road and to the south of the 0-3. Land use is made -up of single family residences, office, a funeral home, a cemetery, commercial, outside amusement and industrial. There are also large parcels that are still vacant. In 1985 an I -2 application was filed for the same piece of property, after an enforcement action was initiated by the city staff. The site had some nonconforming status and it was determined that the owner had expanded the use, a construction storage yard. Prior to being annexed, there was some limited storage taking place and the activity was increased after becoming a part of the city. (The area was January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: A Z- 4461 -A Cont. annexed in 1979.) There was opposition to the I -2 request and the rezoning was denied by the Planning Commission. The denial was appealed to the Board of Directors and the Board also rejected the I -2 proposal. Staff did not support the I -2 in 1985. It is the staff's position that the character of the area has not changed since 1985 and there is no strong justification for an industrial reclassification of the site. The property is within the Otter Creek plan area and the recommended land use is multifamily which was the designation is 1985. The nonresidential areas are located to the south, mixed office and commercial, and north of Baseline Road, industrial. The approval of the 0-3 reinforced the plan's direction and also provides a good transition between the intense zoning, C -4 and I -2, to the south and the residential area to the north. The site is somewhat removed from more desirable nonresidential locations, either Baseline or I -30. Also, the proposed rezoning could have an adverse impact on the nearby residential properties. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is in the Otter Creek District, and the plan recommends multifamily for the property. Staff will review the current plan and existing patterns to determine if multifamily is still appropriate for the area. It appears that some type of plan amendment maybe in order. ENGINEERING COMMENTS, 1. The right -of -way standard for Sibley Hole Road is 25 feet from the centerline. If the existing right -of -way is deficient, dedication of additional right -of -way will be required. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a grading and drainage sketch plan will be need to be provided. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the I -2 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 1, 1994) The applicant, Harold Williams, was present. There were no objectors in attendance. Mr. Williams asked that the item be deferred. Hearing no opposition to the deferral request, the item was placed on the Consent Agenda. F, January 24, 1995 "u :• As part of the Consent Agenda, the rezoning was deferred to the December 13, 1994 meeting. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 13, 1994) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred to allow for additional time to explore other zoning options and to review the land use plan for the area. The applicant was not present, but he had agreed to deferring the request. As part of the Consent Agenda, the item was deferred to the January 24, 1995 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) The applicant, Harold Williams, was present. There were several other interested individuals in attendance. Staff reported that a review of the land use plan for the general area had been initiated after the December 13, 1994 hearing and several meetings were held with the applicant's representatives. Based on the preliminary findings of the review, staff indicated that some type of plan amendment would be recommended to the Board of Directors. Staff said that the plan would show more nonresidential uses along Sibley Hole and no multifamily. Staff went on to say that the applicant would amend the request from I -2 to Planned Development - Industrial for a specific company and all permitted uses in the I -1 district. Staff informed the Commission that written information and site plan have been submitted. (Copies were provided to the Planning Commission.) Staff stated that the site plan was adequate and only needed some minor revisions. Staff then indicated support for the PD- Industrial and that a plan amendment would be recommended to the Board. Harold Williams then addressed the Planning Commission. Mr. Williams discussed the area and then amended the request to PD- Industrial. He also presented letters from residents on Sibley Hole supporting the reclassification. Greg Acord, potential purchaser and developer of the property, said that his company, Phil -Cord Packaging, would occupy the site if the PD- Industrial reclassification is granted. Mr. Acord said that he would make the necessary changes to the site plan, including reducing the driveways from two to one. Mr. Acord also that the neighbor to the south would prefer not to have a screening fence, but would rather have some planted shrubs. Mr. Acord also requested 3 January 24, 1995 A Z- 4461 -A Cont. that the required street improvements be deferred for a period of time. There was some discussion about various issues and staff was asked about their support of the PD- Industrial. Staff explained the plan review and that a nonresidential development pattern was probably more realistic for the area. Harold Williams described the site and said there is little difference in elevation from one end to the other. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, offered some comments about the fence and the screening for the property. There was some additional discussion about several of the issues. A motion was made to recommend approval of the PD- Industrial, deferral of the street improvements for Sibley Hole Road and that the property owners and the staff resolve the fence issue. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absent. 4 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: B Z -5896 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Rose Bickerstaff M. F. Rolih, Jr. by Michael T. Gosby Black Road and Piggee Street (One Block) Rezone from R -2 to R -5 Elderly housing 2.0 acres Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, zoned R -2 South - Vacant, zoned R -2 East - Vacant, zoned R -2 West - Vacant, zoned R -2 STAFF ANALYSIS. The property in question is found in the Pankey neighborhood, and located approximately 3 blocks south of Arkansas State Highway No. 10. The request is to rezone the site from R -2 to R -5 for elderly housing, a total of 56 units. (R -5 Urban Residence allows a density of 36 units per acre). The acreage is situated on the west side of Pankey and bordered by four platted rights -of -way. The site is made up of twelve 50 foot lots and a 10 foot alley (one complete block). At this time, there are two structures on the northern most lots, adjacent to Piggee Street. The balance of the property is undeveloped and heavily wooded. The predominant zoning in the immediate area is R -2 and, in fact, the entire Pankey neighborhood is zoned R -2. To the northwest, there is some C -3 zoning and a PCD area. The land use is primarily single family residences, including new subdivisions to the south and southwest. In the Pankey neighborhood, the land use is single family, with some minor nonconforming uses. The uses found on the nonresidential land are mini - storage units and a small -scale commercial center. Throughout the area, there are vacant parcels and lots. A R -5 rezoning or any multifamily reclassification of this block in conflict with the adopted plan. The land use element of the River Mountain District plan identifies the January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: B Z -5896 Cont. site for single family use; a majority of the Pankey neighborhood is shown as single family. The current plan does recommend a low- density multifamily area north of Pankey Avenue, between Black Road and Wells Street, and another area directly north of Highway 10. The plan also shows a small multifamily area east of Ives Street. This land use concept has been reinforced by the most recent planning effort for the neighborhood, the Donaghey / Pankey plan. The Donaghey Project worked closely with the Pankey community throughout the planning process and relied on the residents' input for direction. The plan has been endorsed by the Planning Commission, but still has not been acted on by the Board of Directors. In addition to the multifamily areas, the Donaghey document also includes a conceptual plan for an elderly housing project on the west side of Black Road. None of the neighborhood or district -wide plans have ever identified the Black Road /Piggee Street block for any use other than single family. Because of the plan and other factors, staff cannot support the R -5 request for the block in question. All the planning studies have recommended other sites for multifamily use and no justification has been provided to change the direction of the plan by reclassifying this particular site. Also, the property is somewhat removed from more desirable multifamily locations and the necessary infrastructure for such an intense development is not in place. Rezoning the block to R -5 would be a significant departure from the adopted plan and could have a very negative impact on the future of Pankey. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family. While the plan does call for low density multifamily to the north, this request is too intensive and too far removed from the major roads. Staff cannot support such an intensive residential use in this location at this time. ENGINEERING COMMENTS, If the rights -of -way for the four streets are deficient, dedication of additional right -of -way will be required. The Master Street Plan standard is 25 feet from the centerline. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the R -5 rezoning. 2 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: B Z -5896 Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 1, 1994) Staff reported that the request needed to be deferred because of a possible notice problem. The item was added to the Consent Agenda, and the Commission deferred the issue to the December 13, 1994 hearing. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 13, 1994) Staff informed the Planning Commission that the item needed to be deferred again because all the required property owners had not been notified. As part of the Consent Agenda, the R -5 request was deferred to the January 24, 1995 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred because all the necessary notice information had not been submitted. As part of the Consent Agenda, the rezoning request was deferred to the March 7, 1995 hearing. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. (Staff told the Commission that this would be the last deferral.) 3 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: C Z- 4431 -C Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Cantrell Loop Partnership III Tom Cole Hwy. 10 at Taylor Loop Rezone from R -2 to C -3 Commercial 3.8 acres Single - Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant, zoned R -2 South - Commercial, zoned PCD and C -3 East - Single - Family, zoned C -3 West - Single - Family, zoned R -2 STAFF ANALYSIS, The request before the Planning Commission is to rezone 3.8 acres on Highway 10 from R -2 to C -3. The site is situated on the north side of the highway, across from the Harvest Foods PCD, and west of where the east end of Taylor Loop intersects Highway 10. There are several structures on the front half of the site and back portion is undeveloped. The acreage has 272 feet of frontage on Highway 10 and an average depth of 619 feet. No specific plans have been submitted for the site. Zoning is R -2, C -3 and PCD, with R -2 being the predominate classification found in the immediate vicinity. The existing PCDs are a Harvest Food Store and two branch banks. Other land use found in the area includes single family, commercial and a church. The C -3 to the east is a small commercial center and there are also some single family residences along the west side of the C -3 tract. In 1985 a C -3 request was filed for the east half of the property (2 acres). The C -3 was denied by the Planning Commission and their action was not appealed to the Board of Directors. Another rezoning proposal, R -2 to 0-2, was also filed in 1985. Again, the request was denied by the Planning Commission and no appeal was made to the Board of Directors. At that time, the adopted plan did not identify the site for any nonresidential use. Staff recommended denial of the C -3 and the 0-2. January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: C Z- 4431 -C Cont. This current C -3 application is an attempt to add commercial acreage at the Taylor Loop intersection with Highway 10 and expand the established node. The adopted plan, River Mountain, does not recommend any commercial expansion on the north side of Highway 10 and shows the site to be within a "transition zone," office or multifamily uses. Therefore, the proposed C -3 reclassification is in conflict with the plan and staff does not support the request. The previous plans for the area have been followed and no strong justification has been offered to alter the current plan by rezoning the 4 acres. If the plan is not maintained, staff is concerned that it will be difficult to deny future commercial requests in the area and this could create the possibility of a linear /strip commercial pattern along Highway 10, something the city has tried to avoid at all cost. For the most part, the plans for the Highway 10 corridor have been adhered to and there is no compelling reason to reverse this trend by endorsing the proposed C -3 reclassification. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is in the River Mountain District. The adopted land use plan recommends Transition Zone. The request is in conflict with the plan. The staff does not believe it is justifiable to amend the Plan from Transition Zone to Commercial at this time. ENGINEERING COMMENTS, The right -of -way requirement 55 feet from the centerline. right -of -way will be required is deficient. STAFF RECOMMENDATION for Highway 10 /Cantrell Road is Dedication of additional if the existing right -of -way Staff recommends denial of the C -3 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 13, 1994) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred because of a possible notice. As part of the Consent Agenda, the C -3 request was deferred to January 24, 1995. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. K January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: C Z- 4431 -C Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) Staff reported that the applicant had requested another deferral. As part of the Consent Agenda, the item was deferred to the March i, 1995 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z -5936 NAME: THE VILLAGE AT CHENAL -- LONG -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: On the west side of Chenal Parkway, approximately 0.75 mile north of the Kanis Road intersection. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Jack McCray Joe White DELTIC FARM AND TIMER CO., INC. WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. #7 Chenal Club Circle 401 S. Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72211 Little Rock, AR 72201 821 -5555 374 -1666 AREA: 138.4 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 80 FT. NEW STREET: 20,000 ZONING• C -2 & R -2 PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 CENSUS TRACT: 42.02 PROPOSED USES: Mixed uses including Commercial, Office, and Residential uses VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The developer states that European style villages and neighborhoods in early American cities fostered a quality of life which the low- density suburban sprawl prevalent in America today has failed to sustain, and, as a consequence, America has lost its sense of community. The design of The Village at Chenal, maintains the applicant, applies leading -edge concepts in Community planning aimed at reversing this condition and reestablishing a village where a real sense of community can flourish. The developer proposes a PCD where a mixture of residential, commercial, office, and civic uses co -exist in a village setting. The site is a 138 -acre tract, with 80.6 acres planned to be developed for single - family uses, 14.0 acres for multi - family, and 43.5 acres for retail, office, and civic. The proposed uses constitute over 1 million square feet of building areas, exclusive of the building areas of single - family dwellings. Development of the PCD is proposed to progress in 2 principal phases, with development beginning in the area west of the future outer loop which bisects the site, and involves about 1/4 million square feet of multi - family, retail- office, and civic building January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5936 area. Development is scheduled to begin with construction around the village center with, initially, service and civic uses. The developer cites ten principles of "The New American Village ": 1) convenience; 2) privacy; 3) security; 4) identity/ individuality; 5) visual pleasure; 6) ecological soundness; 7) affordability; 8) inclusiveness of age; 9) social enjoyment; and, 10) economic feasibility. There are, states the developer, ten elements of "The New American Village ": 1) main street or community focal point; 2) landmarks; 3) walkability; 4) gathering places or civic buildings; 5) linkages between residential and activity centers; linkages between villages and larger context; 6) historical and regional references in plan, layout, and architectures; 7) distinct edge or boundary; 8) narrower streets; 9) new zoning and subdivision standards; and, 10) integration of land uses. There are, continues the developer, qualities which are shared by communities which are successful: 1) The layout must be based on comfortable, feasible walking distances between housing, shops, schools, community services, recreation, jobs, etc. Walking brings people closer to and more in contact with their physical environment, and, this promotes interest in and respect for the village. 2) Villages have a community focus (i.e., a village green, a commons, a mixed use core, a cross- roads, etc.) as a defining architectural element. The core should provide basic employment, shopping, and a mass transit hub. 3) Streets in villages should promote walkability by offering a variety of multiple routes to destinations, and by providing wide streets with street trees and parallel parking to act as a buffer between the pedestrian and moving traffic. Streets should also be created with the convenience of users of the private automobile in mine, and the street network not only provides multiple and alternate routs for pedestrians, but for automobiles. 4) villages should be composed of buildings with a variety of footprints, heights, and scale, and should contain a wide range of residential sizes and types which are affordable by a wide range of age and income groups. village are strengthened by economic, social, and age diversity. 2 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5936 5) Villages have a mix of uses, with mixed uses occurring both horizontally, in adjacent buildings, and vertically, with residences or offices above shops. villages contain a well - proportioned balance of jobs to housing, housing to recreation, housing to retail, and housing to civic and social uses. Buildings that contain uses other than residential uses are located primarily in the community core. 6) Villages make use of a distinct design "vocabulary "; e.g., they use common materials, colors, and building design relationships. Variation within the "vocabulary" gives richness and charter. 7) Maintenance is a priority in village living. Public and community lands and facilities must be maintained to preserve the quality and charter of the place. The physical development of the PCD is in a "conceptual" stage at this point. The location and design of perimeter streets and the bisecting outer loop can be fixed. Beyond this, a general scheme for uses areas and street configuration is proposed. The developer proposes approval of a "conceptual" PCD at this time, and then, as use areas are defined and the concept is firmed up, the developer proposes to submit amended PCD applications for approval. The developer requests, from the outset, however, an understanding on the widths of rights -of -way and streets which will be required for the internal street system, since maintaining street designs which conform to the concept of "The New American Village" is overriding. A. PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for a "conceptual" PCD. Approval by staff and the Commission, and, if necessary, approval by the Board of Directors is sought for street standards for internal streets which are in conformance with the design criteria of "The New American Village ", with narrower right -of -way and street widths, reduced distances between access points and intersections, and angles between intersecting streets which are less than current Ordinance standards. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded. The terrain is hilly. The site is bounded on the east by Chenal Parkway. M January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5936 The existing zoning includes areas which are zoned MF -18, 0-2, and C -2. C. ENGINEERING /UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comments that the following are major deficiencies in the application: 1) the submittal plan does not provide adequate information for review of the plans conformance to the Master Street Plan; the driveways appear out of conformity with the Ordinance; 2) there is no drainage information provided, making it impossible to review the plans for conformance with the stormwater and detention regulations; 3) the lack of contours eliminates the possibility of judging cut and fill requirements; 4) a sketch grading and drainage plan, meeting the requirements of Sec. 29 -186, is required before construction; a grading permit is required, and ADPC &E must be contacted for their approval prior to starting work. Traffic Engineering comments that: 1) trip generation volumes must be provided to insure interior streets and intersections will handle projected traffic volumes; 2) widths of street sections must be shown; 3) curve data and tangent distances must be shown, and must be in compliance with the Master Street Plan; and, 4) the internal street system should not have parking backing into the traffic stream. Water Works reports that, in addition to the normal charges, an acreage charge of $300 per acre applies in this area. Water Main extensions and on -site fire protection will be required. Wastewater comments that sewer main extensions, with easements, will be required. Capacity contributions will be required. Capacity Contribution fees will be required for multi - family construction. The Fire Department comments that wider turning radii should be provided at all interior streets. The Fire Department notes that, with proposed street widths of 201, it will be next to impossible to get fire equipment into the area. The Fire Department notes that "No Parking; Tow - Away" signs are to be placed along all designated streets to prohibit on- street parking. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. approved the submittal without comment. 4 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5936 Landscape review notes that the areas set aside for buffers around the perimeter of the site meet Ordinance requirements. Areas set aside within the interior of the site for landscaping appear to meet the Landscape Ordinance requirements. Screening and many of the buffers within the site itself, that would normally be required, are absent. The Planning Division staff comments that the site is in the Chenal District. The adopted plan recommends community shopping, neighborhood shopping, multi - family and public/ institutional. The proposal maintains most of these uses while altering the mix and location. Staff is aware the applicant is attempting to address desires raised by planning efforts of Metroplan, and staff wishes to be supportive of attempts to try new theories; however, all issues must be carefully and thoroughly reviewed and considered before approval. D. ISSUES /LEGAL /TECHNICAL /DESIGN: Section 36 -456 of the Zoning Regulations requires the following information to be furnished, which has not been submitted to date: a topographic cross section; a schematic landscaping plan and the proposed treatment of perimeters of the property; dimensions of structures and the dimensions between buildings and of building distances from property lines; contours; a legal description of the area; and a preliminary plat of the proposed development area. These item will be furnished as amended PCD site plan are submitted, and can be deferred until that time. A complete legal description, however, must be furnished in order to write the ordinance establishing the PCD. Sections 31 -171 through 31 -209 establish design standards for developments which require, among other things, conformance with the Master Street Plan requirements for right -of -way widths, street section designs, and sidewalks. The proposed street layout does not necessarily conform to these standards, but, instead, attempts to recapture a village concept where rights -of -way and streets are narrower and pedestrian traffic is encouraged. Ordinance No. 16,577 requires that access points to sites are to be a minimum or 100 feet from the right -of -way of intersecting streets, and requires common driveway points on lots which are less than 300 feet of frontage. The proposed street system does not necessarily conform to these standards, since design of the PCD site is governed by the concepts of creating "The New American Village ". 5 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5936 E. ANALYSIS• The book Site Planning and Community Design for Great Neighborhoods, by Frederick D. Jarvis, is only one of many publication promoting a re- thinking of the design of communities, neighborhoods, and cities, and proposing new models for the creation of more livable communities that are both economically feasible and responsive to growing environmental concerns. The applicant's concept is described in Jarvis' book in his section on "Neotraditional Town and Pedestrian Pockets ", and Jarvis indicates that this is an example of new models that are being tested in the early 1990's. The Planning Division staff has some concerns about particular elements of the proposal, and believe more detailed discussions and plans are needed about the following: 1) the single family use along La Grand Drive; 2) the characteristics, mix and delivery, and the means of waste disposal for the large retail complex; 3) the "need" for large footprint commercial- grocery, department store, etc.; 4) the physical division which the "West Loop" makes and how this will be addressed; 5) the lack of parking facilities for the Community Center; 6) the addressing of the issues of the integration of public transportation; 7) the issue of the public uses which should be given to the appropriate public agency or removed from the plan; and, 8) the integration of pedestrian and vehicular access of the outlying single family into the development should be addressed. The Planning Division staff continues that land use issues have impacts on the long term developability of the immediate area as well as surrounding areas. Staff believes that if the issues raised are properly addressed, than the proposal could work within the existing adopted city land use plan. The proposal is a "conceptual" PCD, and there must be a firm understanding that, as specific areas are developed, the PCD will be amended, and subsequent drawings will be reviewed for conformance with regulations. The current review is for the "concept" only. An agreement with the developer for conformance with the Master Street Plan requirements for boundary streets will be necessary with the approval of the "conceptual PCD"; however, as amended PCD applications are presented, the internal street system will be required to comply with Master Street Plan requirements, or the application will have to seek waivers or variances of these requirements from the Board of Directors. 0 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5936 F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the "conceptual" PCD, subject to the boundary streets conforming to the Master Street Plan requirements and to the requirements of Ordinance No. 16,577. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (DECEMBER 22, 1994) Mr. Jack McCray and Mr. Joe White were present. Staff presented the request, and Mr. McCray and Mr. White reviewed the application with the Committee members. Mr. McCray made a presentation on the concept of "The New American Village" and of the proposed Village at Chenal. The City Engineering staff expressed concerns regarding the proposed street system, and insisted that it be understood that, until engineering drawings showing the design of the various streets, it was withholding approval of boundary and internal street designs. Mr. White indicated that it would be necessary to seek approval from the Board of Directors for the proposed street design, if it is determined that the proposed design is in conflict with City standards. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 10, 1995) Mr. Jack McCray, the Real Estate manager with Deltic Farm and Timber Co., the applicant, and Mr. Joe White, with White - Daters & Associates, Inc., were present. Mr. McCray indicated that the proposed development is the commercial component to the Chenal Valley development which has been under way for several years, and that the approach which has been chosen for this commercial component is characterized as a "village" concept. "Gathering" places will be created, he explained, which will encourage pedestrian traffic and reduce vehicular traffic. He indicated that the first phase of the proposed development is to be located on the west side of the future west loop street, and will involve approximately 140 acres, of which about 75% is to be devoted to single - family dwelling sites. The remaining 25% is to be developed for retail, office, and civic uses. He explained that the request is for approval of a "concept ", specifically, the "village" concept, with more specific plans and uses to be submitted as development progresses in specific sites. Approval of the "village" concept would, he added, necessitate approval of the street "grid" which is shown on the development plan, and the street and right -of -way widths which are narrower than the Master Street Plan now permits. 7 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5936 Ms. Ruth Bell, representing the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County, spoke in support of the application. She said that the City should give the developer the chance to try the concept to see if, indeed, it will work. Bill Henry, the manager for traffic engineering with the Public Works Department, expressed concern over approval of the street layout and right -of -way and street widths which the developer proposed. He said that the layout of the streets does not meet standard traffic engineering principals, as far as some traffic safety issues are concerned. The alignments of some of the intersections do not meet safety standards, he stated. He suggested that the "concept" of the PCD be approved, but discouraged the approval of the street layout and the rights -of- way and street widths which do not meet the Master Street Plan requirements. Mr. McCray responded that, in order to proceed with the design and marketing of the project, the approval of the proposed street layout and right -of -way and street widths must be established at the outset. Mr. Henry expressed concerns regarding the safety, as well as the accessibility, of the site, with the street widths being less than standard engineering practices and the Master Street Plan provide. Mr. McCray responded that the "Neo- Traditional Village" with its "pedestrian pockets" necessitates the narrower street system; the concept of the village is dependent upon these being approved in order to promote the "pedestrian friendly" environment. The developer, he stated, does not intend to build a system which is unsafe or inaccessible; the developer, he states, would accommodate the concerns of the Fire Department and of Public Works. In the retail areas, he continued, a system of rear private access ways would be provided for delivery trucks, so that delivery trucks will not be double - parked in the streets. He indicated that the angle of intersecting streets, about which Public Works has noted a concern previously, had been addressed, with the angle being adjusted at the intersection. He said that the public transportation system would have a centralized "gathering" point for riders, and that busses would not be traveling along the narrow residential or commercial streets. He related that the village concept is being implemented in cities across the country, and that the concept is being implemented successfully. Mr. White added that the older part of downtown Little Rock has many 36 foot wide streets which have parking along both sides of the street; that this concept for street widths is a 70 -80 year old concept to which city planners wish to return in order to re- achieve a pedestrian friendly village. The narrower streets January 24, 1995 D Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5936 promote slower traffic; the wider streets promote faster traffic, he said, and the slower traffic is the desired effect. David Scherer, with the Public Works staff, reminded the Commission that the developer is seeking approval of the streets as public streets, not private streets, and that any variance from the Master Street Plan standards will necessitate Board of Directors approval. Jim Lawson, Interim Assistant City Manager, spoke, and urged the Commission to approve the conceptual PCD. He said that the concept is being implemented across the country, and where it has been implemented, it has been successful. He said that the street system cannot be judged on the basis of what has been done for the past 10 -15 years, because it is different, but he said, the differences between the proposed street system and the Master Street Plan standards can be worked out. Tim Polk, Acting Director of Neighborhoods and Planning, cited a book written by Frederick D. Jarivs, Site Planninq and Community Design, and read selections form it dealing with the concept of the "neo- traditional neighborhood" and "pedestrian pockets ". He indicated that this is the first of a number of such projects which will be heard by the Commission, and urged the Commission to approve the PCD. Commissioner Walker related that the PUD or PD o have a provision which allows the Commission and Directors to approve a specific street design as PD; that the Engineering staff cannot do its job Street Plan is not amended to accept the streets proposed in a PUD or PD. rdinance needs to Board of part of a PUD or if the Master which are Mr. White clarified the request: the proposed west loop and the perimeter collector street are to meet the Master Street Plan standards; all the streets in the commercial areas of the site are to be 36 foot streets; the residential streets are to be 24 foot streets, which is provided for in the Master Street Plan for minor residential streets. Mr. McCray related that he would request Planning Commission approval of the concept of the PCD at this meeting, but would ask that further consideration of the requested variances from the Master Street Plan standards be deferred until further meetings with staff could be held to hammer out the staff concerns. A motion was made and seconded to approve the "Conceptual" PCD, exclusive of approval of the requested variances for street rights -of -way and street widths, and with the public hearing on these variance items being deferred until the applicant and staff have met to address the City Engineering staff's concerns. The motion carried with the vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, and 0 abstentions. January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5936 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) Mr. Joe White, with White- Daters and Associates, Inc., was present to represent the developer. Staff reported that the conceptual PCD had been approved by the Commission on January 10, 1995, but that at that meeting, a recommendation on the requested variances had been deferred. Staff reported that a meeting involving the developer, the Public works staff, and the Neighborhoods and Planning Staff had been held, and that specific variance requests had been discussed. Mr. Joe White reported that the applicant was proposing that the streets serving commercial and multi -use areas have 36 foot wide streets within a 56 foot wide right -of -way; streets serving single - family areas with no more than 50 homes have 24 foot wide streets within a 44 foot right -of -way; streets serving larger single- family areas have a 32 foot wide street in a 52 foot right -of -way; and alleys have 12 foot wide pavement within a 22 foot right -of -way. He noted that the proposal includes that, in commercial and multi -use areas, the sidewalk area is to be landscaped and extended 16 feet on both sides of the street; in the smaller single- family areas, where the streets are to be 24 feet wide, sidewalks are proposed along one side only of the right -of -way; and that in the larger single - family areas, sidewalks are to be constructed along both sides of the rights - of -way and parking is to be allowed on both sides of the street. He reported that the developer and the City staff had agreed that all radii would be a minimum of 25 feet; that on- street parking would be restricted to a minimum of 30 feet from intersections of street lines; and that the angle of street intersections will be within 15 degrees of 90 degrees. He reported that an agreement had been reached with the City staff that the developer, and eventually the village property owners association, would pay the cost differential for maintenance of other - than - normal materials in the public right -of -way. He said that the concern of Public works and the Fire Department for planting and pedestrian areas which extend into the street would be addressed by having these areas level with the driving surface and be able to be driven over, yet might have different types of materials used to differentiate them. A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the variances. The motion carried with the vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions. 10 January 24, 1995 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: James L. Douglas James L. Douglas 8624 Asher Avenue Rezone from C -3 to C -4 Auto body and paint shop 0.264 acres Auto body and paint shop SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Optimist Club facility, zoned R -3 South - Commercial, zoned C -3 East - Commercial, zoned C -3 West - Single - Family and Commercial, zoned R -3, R -4 and C -3 ,STAFF ANALYSIS, The property at 8624 Asher Avenue has a number of commercial uses on it, ranging from small retail shops to a car wash, and several buildings. This application involves one structure and the request is to rezone the site from C -3 to C -4 for an auto body shop. (Auto paint or body rebuilding shop is not a conditional use in the C -3 district.) The building in question is on the back side of the site and a 25 foot strip to Asher Avenue is included because land being used as access shall be located on property which is zoned to allow the principal use. Only one of the buildings is part of the request and the balance of the site will remain C -3 if the request is granted. There are four other structures on the property and the majority of it is paved. Zoning along this portion is mixed and includes R -3, R -4, C -1, C -3 and C -4. The base residential zoning to the north is R -3 and to the south it is R -2. Along John Barrow Road, there is also some 0-3 land. There is no defined zoning pattern along Asher and the commercial zoning is a combination of C -3 and C -4. The most recent rezoning action involved land at the northwest corner of Asher and Barrow, and the reclassification was to C -3. Land use is made -up single family, office, commercial, warehousing and the Rosedale Optimist Club. The existing commercial activity covers the full spectrum of uses, retail, service and auto related. January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 1 Z -5925 Cont. what is being proposed with this rezoning request raises several issues or concerns, including creating an irregular zoning configuration and placing C -4 next to single family residences. The city has made an effort to discourage C -4 zoning adjacent to a residential neighborhood and this should be no exception. The plan does show the site for commercial use and the city has supported C -3 and C -4 along much of Asher. However, in most instances, the C -4 was not abutting single family areas. The proposed C -4 area would also continue the somewhat haphazard zoning pattern found along Asher and this should not be reinforced by rezoning the property to C -4. The boundaries for the C -4 do not define a viable use area or a logical zoning area. A more reasonable approach for reclassifying the site would be the PUD process for the entire ownership. This would allow for a more thorough review and ensure closer compliance to the ordinance. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is in the Boyle Park District. The Plan recommends Commercial use. There is an issue of the desirability of C -4 Open Display zoning next to R -3 Single Family zoning. ENGINEERING COMMENTS. The right -of -way standard for Asher is 45 feet from the centerline. If the existing right -of -way is deficient, dedication of additional right -of -way will be required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the C -4 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) Staff informed the Planning Commission that the applicant had requested that the rezoning be withdrawn without prejudice. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn without prejudice. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 2 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 2 Z -5929 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Gerald Staley Gerald Staley 9222 Stagecoach Road Rezone from R -2 to C -4 Retail and storage complex 19.2 acres Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant and Single - Family, zoned R -2 South - Vacant, zoned R -2 East - Single - Family, zoned R -2 West - Vacant, zoned MF -6 STAFF ANALYSIS, The property in question, approximately 20 acres, is located on the west side of Stagecoach Road (Hwy. No. 5) between west Baseline Road and the entrance to Otter Creek. The acreage is zoned R -2 and the request is to reclassify the entire 20 acres to C -4. At this time, the proposal is to develop the site for retail, office warehouse and mini - storage units - a "retail and storage complex." The tentative plans call for the commercial uses to be located adjacent to Stagecoach, then an office warehouse area and the mini - storage units towards the back of the property. No specific plans have been submitted and the only issue before the Commission is the request for a C -4 rezoning. The site has 950 feet of frontage along Stagecoach Road and an average depth of 1,100 feet. Zoning in the general vicinity is R -2, MF -6, MF -12, MF -18, 0-2, C -2, C -3, I -2 and OS. The existing commercial zoning is found at the Stagecoach /Baseline intersection and the I -2 is north of Baseline. There is also some C -1 and C -2 zoning at Stagecoach and Otter Creek development. The Otter Creek commercial zoning was accomplished through a master plan for the development and has always been viewed as the community shopping center for the area. The commercial zoning at Stagecoach and Baseline has occurred because of being the intersection of two arterials. Land use is primarily single family. Other uses include a church, commercial and industrial. There are several nonconforming uses and a high percentage of the area is undeveloped, especially the January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 2 Z -5929 Cont. existing multifamily tracts. To the east of Stagecoach Road, there is a substantial floodway which prohibits any development. The adopted Otter Creek District Plan shows the site as part of a large multifamily area and does not recognize any of the 20 acres for commercial use. The commercial areas identified on the plan are adequate to serve the area for the foreseeable future and there is no justification to increase the commercial inventory by supporting the requested C -4 reclassification. Allowing this rezoning could encourage other commercial requests and which could lead to an undesirable strip development pattern along Stagecoach Road. Rezoning a 20 acres site to C -4 at this location could create immediate problems for the surrounding uses and could affect future development in the area. This location has never been identified for any use other than residential. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is in the Otter Creek District. The Plan recommends Multifamily use. There has not been a change in condition to justify a change in the land use plan to this degree. Beside the land use conflict, there are concerns the zoning could lead to strip development along Stagecoach Road and the undesirability of C -4 Open Display zoning next to Low Density Residential use areas. ENGINEERING COMMENTS, 1. Stagecoach Road requires a 45 foot right -of -way from the centerline. Dedication of additional right -of -way if the existing right -of -way is deficient. 2. If a building permit is requested, the following will be required: • A sketch grading and drainage plan meeting the requirements of Section 29 -186 is required. A Development Permit will be required before any work is started. • Sidewalks will be required. ® Street plans, stormwater detention, and stormwater drainage will be required. Full 1/2 of 60 foot minor arterial street improvements. 100 percent of upgrade of culvert crossing Stagecoach. • Driveways will require approval of Traffic Engineering. 2 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 2 Z -5929 Cont. AHTD will need to approve proposal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the C -4 rezoning request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) The applicant, Gerald Staley, was present. There were several other interested persons in attendance. Mr. Staley spoke and requested a deferral to the March 7, 1995 meeting. Nobody objected to deferring the rezoning request. The item was added to the Consent Agenda and deferred to the March 7, 1995 hearing. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z -5930 Owner: BCK Contractors, Inc. Applicant: Bill C. Keathley Location: 3200 Baseline Road Request: Rezone from R -2 to I -2 Purpose: Contractor's Office and Storage Yard Size: 0.46 acres Existing Use: Contractor's Office and Storage Yard SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Auto repair, zoned R -2 South - Vacant, zoned R -2 East - Industrial, zoned R -2 West - Single - Family, zoned R -2 STAFF ANALYSIS, This rezoning issue is before the Planning Commission because of an enforcement action by the City. 3200 Baseline is zoned R -2, with C -3 nonconforming status. The applicant relocated his contractor's operation to the site, which requires I -2 or C -4 and a conditional use permit. The request is to rezone the half acre from R -2 to I -2. The property is occupied by one building and a majority of the site is paved. 3200 Baseline has 100 feet of frontage on Baseline and a depth of 200 feet. Zoning in the immediate vicinity is R -2. At the Baseline and Hilaro Springs /Scott Hamilton intersection, there is some commercial zoning, C -2 and C -4. There is also a C -3 parcel on Scott Hamilton, approximately two blocks north of Baseline. The property in question is surrounded by R -2 zoning. Land use is single family, multifamily, commercial, auto service, churches and an elementary school. There are a number of nonconforming uses and there is a large undeveloped area to the east because of floodplain and floodway involvement. The land use pattern found in the neighborhood is typical for the Baseline corridor. An industrial reclassification is in conflict with the adopted plan, and staff cannot support the I -2 rezoning request. The plan identifies other areas for industrial use, to the north and northwest, and nothing has happened to January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z -5930 Cont. justify a change in the direction of the plan. Approval of the I -2 would create a spot zoning, something the city has tried to discourage as much as possible. Also, here is an established single family neighborhood to the north and its livability should be protected by denying the I -2 request. LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT The site is in the Geyer Springs East District. The Plan recommends Residential use. while the use has been Nonresidential, in order to protect the existing Single Family neighborhood to the north any nonresidential use should be carefully reviewed to minimize negative impacts. There is no justification for industrial zoning at this time. ENGINEERING COMMENTS, 1. Dedication of additional right -of -way will be required for Baseline Road because the existing right -of -way is deficient. The right -of -way standard is 45 feet from the centerline. (The owner will need to conform proper site mitigation of the underground tanks prior to dedicating the necessary right -of -way.) 2. If a building permit is requested, the following will be required. • A sketch grading and drainage plan meeting the requirements of Section 29 -186 is required. A Development Permit will be required before any work. • Sidewalks on Unity Lane. • Street plans and stormwater drainage for Unity Lane. Full 1/2 of 27 foot residential street improvements. • Closure will be required of eastern drive on Baseline Road. • AHTD will need to approve proposal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the I -2 rezoning request. 2 January 24, 1995 ITEM NO.: 3 Z -5930 Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 24, 1995) The applicant, Bill Keathley, was present. There were no objectors in attendance. Mr. Keathley spoke and made some comments about the staff review. Mr. Keathley then discussed the area and the existing uses. He pointed out that the only new development is at the corner of Baseline and Hilaro Springs. Mr. Keathley told the Commission that he is making use of a property that had been abandoned and becoming an eyesore. He said the area has problems and he is just trying to put some property to good use, an effort to revitalize southwest Little Rock. Mr. Keathley went on to say that the lot has a 6 foot fence and outside storage of materials and equipment is taking place. There was a long discussion about various issues, including the land use plan and nonconforming uses in the area. Comments were offered by Bill Keathley and several commissioners. Kenny Scott, Chief of Zoning Enforcement, then reviewed the history of the property. Mr. Scott said a privilege license was granted for an office and cabinet work because the property has C -3 nonconforming status. Mr. Scott said a violation notice was issued because of the outside storage. Mr. Scott made some other comments and told the Commission that he viewed what he described as "light fabrication and assembly" taking place inside the building. There was some more discussion about different issues. Bill Keathley spoke again and said that there would not be a lot of outside storage and the storage areas could be screened. The Planning Commission voted on the R -2 to I -2 rezoning request. The I -2 was denied by a vote of 0 ayes, 8 ayes, 2 absent and 1 abstention (D. Daniel). 3 0 O w cc w F- 0 z O 0 O z z z Q J d v J z 0 QN ti Lu Q D C) c a Q 0) .. U) m u z w U) m w z V w ¢ 1 i �N, � I cc W n--T w U) ¢ LU Z ¢ W W I— W W w z z ¢ N C� F= Z N z LLJ J } 0 - w z0ZO Y U�J J m ¢ J z O= U W O ¢ m cc: W C) c a Q 0) .. U) m u z w U) m w z V w ¢ i F— O LU F- Z d¢wwF- W H w J¢ ¢ cm w Q Q� U 2 U LU J¢ J — w z z j _ U U¢¢ Z N 2 cr- w >- Q w Z C) W �,Z o U 0 ¢ J CO z m D Z uj0o� 0 O l= N J w¢ co Y -� C) c a Q 0) .. U) m u z w U) m w z V w ¢ January 24, 1995 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. Date _ �t -0 cret� Cha' man —