HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutesNovember 15, 2001
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: LU01-08-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City
Planning District
Location: 2408 Wolfe St.
Request: Single Family to Commercial
Source: Emma Rogers
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning
District from Single Family 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 use the property for day
care and selected 0-1 and C-2 uses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is occupied by a vacant building and is
currently zoned R-4 Two Family and R-5 Urban Residence and
is approximately .94+ acres in size. All of the
surrounding property is zoned R-4 Two Family. A church
occupies the neighboring property to the south while the
property to the west is the campus of the Mitchell
Elementary School. The remainder of the surrounding
property is developed with housing.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On January 4, 2000 a change was made from Single Family to
Mixed Use at 2311 S. Spring Street about 1 mile East of the
applicant's property.
On June 15, 1999 a change was made from Single Family and
Mixed Use to Public Institutional on Wright Avenue and Park
Street about a 1-� mile Northwest of the property in
question.
On June 1, 1999 a change was made from Mining to Park/Open
Space, Industrial, and Single Family at Arch Street and I-
30 about 1 mile Southeast of the area in question.
November 15, 2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU01-08-02
The applicant's property is shown as Single Family on the
Future Land Use Plan. The surrounding property is all
shown as Single Family except for the property to the west
that is shown as Public Institutional.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
The Master Street Plan shows Roosevelt Road as a Principal
Arterial. 24th Street, Battery Street, and Wolfe Street are
shown as Standard Residential streets. There are no
bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan that would be
affected by this amendment.
PARKS:
The 2001 Little Rock Park and Recreation Master Plan
proposes an eight -block strategy of providing facilities
within an eight block radius of all residential areas. The
plan also states that playground facilities (such as the
one at Mitchell Elementary) are included in the eight -block
strategy.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in an area not covered by a
city recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant's property lies in the Central High School
National Historic District. The historic district is
intended to preserve the neighborhood surrounding the
historic site. Any future development in this area would
need to fit the design guidelines of the historic district.
The purpose of the guidelines is to provide standards to
preserve the area's unique architectural heritage. The
guidelines are not intended to hinder the continued
maintenance or repair of a structure, but are used
primarily for projects that involve a new addition to a
house or for design projects that may be seen from the
street. Overall, the intension of design guidelines is for
the preservation of a structure's architecture; guidelines
K
November 15, 2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU01-08-02
are viewed as broadly as possible in order to enable the
property owner to maintain the property and retain
architectural elements.
Mitchell Elementary School is located across Battery Street
from this application and the Gospel Temple Baptist Church
lying immediately to the south. The neighboring public
institutional uses are of a scale that is compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood. C-2 and 0-1 uses, as
proposed, in the neighborhood would introduce the potential
for a wide variety of uses near the elementary school.
Some of the allowable uses such as daycare center, private
schools, and kindergartens would be compatible with the
school across the street and fit the character of the
neighborhood. Other allowable uses such as eating
establishments, beauty shops, and Laundromats would not be
compatible with the school across the street and would not
fit the residential character of the neighborhood.
Commercial uses across from a school on a residential
street may cause traffic conflicts from both the loading
and unloading of school students and the commercial traffic
throughout the day. In addition, the residential streets
serving the property would need to support a greater volume
of traffic than the streets are designed to accommodate.
The applicant's property sits in the middle of the block
midway between Roosevelt Road to the south and W.24th Street
to the north. The applicant's property fronts on both
Wolfe and Battery Streets. However, the frontage along
Wolfe Street is wider than the frontage along Battery
Street. Any conflicts of loading and unloading of students
would occur on Battery Street. Regardless of which side of
the applicant's property the loading and unloading of
students takes place, the loading and unloading would take
place in mid -block.
Most of the neighborhood's commercial property sits at the
intersection of Roosevelt Road and Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. Drive. There is also vacant property zoned for
commercial uses located west of Summit Street on Roosevelt
Road.
3
November 15, 2001
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU01-08-02
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood
associations: Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association,
Central High Neighborhood Association, East of Broadway
Neighborhood Association, Meadowbrook Neighborhood
Association, MLK Neighborhood Association, South End
Neighborhood Association, South End Neighborhood
Developers, and Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association. At
this time staff has not received any comments from area
residents or neighborhood associations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. A change to
Commercial would place a conflicting land use category
inside a residential neighborhood in an area where there
are available existing non-developed commercial areas.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 4, 2001)
Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the
commission. Dana Carney, City Staff, initiated a
discussion about the timing of the notices for the related
zone change case in item 2.1. After a brief discussion
between the Planning Commission, City Staff, the
representative of the applicant, and Mr. Cedric Rogers, a
determination was made that the applicant missed the
deadline for mailing notices to the neighboring property
owners. Because of this The Commission voted to defer the
request for rezoning. A determination was made to defer
the Land Use Plan item in order to be discussed at the same
meeting as the related zoning item.
A motion to defer item 2 to the November 15, 2001 meeting
and was approved with a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no, and 2 absent.
4