HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutesMarch 25, 2004
1TEM NO.: J FILE NO.: LU03-18-03
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District
Location: 15500 Chenal Parkway ,
Recuest: Suburban Office to Commercial
Source: Joe White, White-Daters & Associates
PROPOSAL ! REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Suburban
Office to Commercial. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail
and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and
general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale,
depending on the trade area that they serve. The applicant wishes to build an
automobile dealership.
Staff is not expanding the application since a land use review is a part of a
Neighborhood Action Plan currently being updated.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is mostly vacant land with a few small buildings located on the
curve of Kanis Road currently zoned 0-2 Office and Institutional and is about
13.5 acres t in size. The land in the median of Chenal Parkway is zoned PR -
Parks and Recreation while the north side of Chenal Parkway is vacant land
zoned C-3 General Commercial. The houses in the subdivision east of the
applicant's property are zoned R-2 Single Family..A strip of vacant land along
the north side of Kanis Road is zoned 0-2. The south side of Kanis Road
consists of vacant land zoned 0-2. The neighboring land to the west consists of
a business zoned R-2 on the north side of Kanis Road and a house built on a
large lot south of Kanis Road.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On June 17, 2003, multiple changes were made from Office, Single Family, and
Multifamily to Multifamily and Low Density Residential for an area north of
Chenal Parkway and south of Rahling Road about 1/3 of a mile northwest of the
study area to accommodate proposed development and recognize existing
conditions.
March 25, 2004
cr
On April 17, 2001 a change was made from Single Family, Multifamily, a
Open Space to Community Shopping at Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway Park
starting over 3/ of a mile to the west of the application area to acCC7mmoda aY
proposed development. to
On January 4, 2040 a change was made form Office to Mixed Office C❑
at 15500 Chenal Parkway across the street north of the applicant' property
to al
accommodate proposed development,
p p rty to
On April 20, 1999 a change Was made from office to Mixed Office Co
on Chenal Parkway east of Kirk Road about % of a mile west of the a mmerciat
area to accommodate proposed development. pp cation
On March 2, 1999 multiple changes were made from Low DensityRes
Transition, and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family, Low ident�al,
Density
Residential, Single Family, Suburban Office, and Mixed Office Commerci
Kanis Road within one mile east of the property in question to reco n along
conditions. g fze e existing
The applicant's property is shown as Suburban Office on the Future L
Plan. The median of Chenal Parkway is shown as Park I Open S ac and Use
land to the north is shown as Commercial, The land to the east is shown as
Single Family with a small strip of Suburban Offices p e while the
e north
Kanis Road. The south side of Kanis Road is shown as Suburban Offs side of
west, a strip of Park 1 Open Space is shown along the floodway of Roc'ke e the
while Commercial is shown further to the west at the intersection of Kanis
with Chenal Parkway. anis Road
MASTER STREET PLAN.
Chenal Parkway is shown as a Principal Arterial built with a four -lane Parkway
cross section as required by ordinance. Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Art
al
and is built as a rural two-lane road. Kanis Road needs improvement i order
conform to the Master Street Plan standards for Minor Arterials. A Classr to
bikeway is shown for Chenal parkway from Big
Hhway 10.
Bowman Road to State i l
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 show a Potential
Greenbelt along Rock Creek in the median of Chenal Parkway, The plan
develop the median of Chenal Parkway as a linear park and will incl plande this e to
construction of the Class f bikeway shown on the Master Street Plan
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
E
March 25, 2004
ITEM NO.: J Cont. FILE NO.: LU03-18-03
Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek
Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and Commercial Development goal listed
an action statement that recommends the aggressive use of Planned Zoning
Districts to influence more neighborhood -friendly and better quality development.
ANALYSIS:
This amendment would increase the area shown for Commercial uses along
Chenal Parkway at the expense of areas available for office developments. A
change to Commercial at this location is a further break with the original Rock
Creek Parkway (now Chenal) plan, which recommended office and multifamily
use along this portion of Chenal Parkway (formerly Rock Creek Parkway). The
original land use pattern for the area placed low intensity land use patterns along
Chenal Parkway (formerly Rock Creek Parkway) and the more intense land uses
away from Rock Creek. This change would further intensify land development
along the Rock Creek portion of Chenal Parkway.
The primary purpose of the areas shown as Park / Open Space in the vicinity of
the applicant's property is to protect the integrity of Rock Creek. The strip of
PK/OS shown along the banks of Rock Creek provides a buffer between the
more intense uses west of Rock Creek from the less intense uses to the east.
Development of the applicant's property would need to be done in a manner that
would minimize any run-off towards Rock Creek with the goal of preserving the
ecological and hydrological integrity of the Rock Creek.
This change would introduce a use in an area that is incompatible with
neighboring uses. Any non-residential development of this site needs to be
compatible with the adjacent residential properties.. If this amendment were
approved, the Planned Zoning Development process governing the development
of the applicant's property should be required. If a proposed development has
design characteristics that are incompatible with residential properties, potential
negative impacts from non-residential development could be minimized if the
PZD process governed future proposals. The current Suburban Office category
would allow non-residential development to take place at this location under the
PZD process. The development of the property should be minimized in size
dimensions and avoid the mass and bulk typical of commercial developments
that are incompatible with neighboring residential uses. The development of the
property with Suburban Office uses with a PZD increases the likelihood that the
negative impacts of size, mass and bulk of development would be minimized.
3
March 25, 2004
ITEM NQ,: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-03
Any development of the applicant's property would require access that may
affect the flow of traffic on Chenal and Kanis, and would need to be designed in
a manner, which would minimize any potential disruptions. The applicant's
property is situated to benefit from double frontage- along two arterials. Chenal
Parkway is intended to have a daily traffic count of 25,000 vehicles per day,
while Kanis road is intended to have a daily traffic count of 18,000 vehicles per
day. Principal Arterials are intended to serve through traffic on a regional level,
while Minor Arterials are intended to serve through traffic at a more local level.
The proposed change, along with vacant areas shown as Commercial, and the
possibility of commercial development in vacant areas shown as Mixed Office
Commercial could result in a corridor of commercial development along Chenal
Parkway from the intersection of Wellington Hills Road to the western
intersection of Kanis Road west of Kirk Road. The removal of Suburban Office
could reduce the area of land available for the development of small-scale
offices and increase the intensity of office development in areas, which would
remain for quite office uses.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Gibraltar/Pt.
West/Timber Ridge, Parkway Place Property Owners Association, Spring Valley
Manor Property Owners Association, Carriage Creek Property Owners
Association, St. Charles Property Owners Association, SW Little Rock UP, and
WCLR Coalition of Neighborhoods. Staff has received one comment from area
residents. The comment received was opposed to the change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This change is incompatible with
the uses to the east.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: - (December 4, 2003)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 29, 2004
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent
agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent, and 1 recuse.
4
March 25, 2004
NO.: J (Co
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
FILE NO.: LU03-18-03
(January 29, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the March 11, 2004
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent
agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes,..0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(March 11, 2004)
The applicant chose to defer this item for two weeks when offered because there
were only eight voting members present. A motion was made to defer the item
until March 25, 2004. The motion was approved with a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes,
2 absent and 1 recusal.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 25, 2004)
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. Donna
James made a presentation of item J.1 so the discussion could coincide with the
discussion for item J. See item J.1 for a complete discussion concerning the
Long Form Planned Commercial Development.
James Dietz made a presentation supporting the application. He spoke of the
additional buffer to the east and the west that amounted to about three acres of
landscaping and buffers on the site. He spoke of other changes to the
development that was to be better to the neighbors. He said that if the site was
developed for office uses, it could amount to 3600 vehicles per day instead of
the estimated 600-700 trips per day for the car lot.
Brian Gibson spoke in opposition to the application. He stated that this was not
smart growth or smart development and was not in keeping with the
neighborhood. He stated that the neighborhood knew it was office, but was not
supportive of the commercial. He continued that the neighborhood action plan
reviewed the Future Land Use Plan recently, and did not support any changes to
the plan. He stated that they also they had discussed the over
commercialization of the neighborhood in proportion to the residential
development.
Stan Kugman stated that this was his first home purchased. He continued
stating that property values would go down and kill the neighborhood. He spoke
of conflicts between Baker Elementary School and the development.
5
March 25, 2004
ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU03-18-03
David Raley spoke in opposition to the application. He stated that a body shop
operating seven days a week is too intense. He stated that the noise on site
would also be too intense. He preferred the office use as a buffer.
Lenice Garrison is opposed to the change. She stated that she has thirty-five
pages of signatures against the change. She stated that the car lot would be in
the backyard of the homes on Woodcrest and asked for a more gradual change.
Mr. Dietz clarified comments about the zoning application and restated the large
buffers to the east and west.
Tim Daters, of White Daters Engineering, presented information that if the site
was developed for office uses, it could amount to 3600 vehicles per day instead
of the estimated 600-700 trips per day for the car lot. He also spoke of smaller
buffers if the site was developed in small lot office uses.
Commissioner Bob Lowery asked Mr. Gibson about the traffic counts of the car
lot versus the office development. Mr. Gibson stated that the neighborhood
opposes the commercial on that site. He continued that with the soft market for
offices, that they thought it would be a while before any office would be built.
Commissioner Norm Floyd said the vehicle counts are the worst-case scenario.
He continued that the neighborhood had expectations of 0-2 uses, not C-4 uses.
A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with
a vote of 0 ayes, 9 noes, 1 absent and 1 recusal.
A