Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4016-D Staff Analysis1. Meeting Date: April 19, 1994 2. Case No.: Z -4016-D 3. Recruest: Establishment of the P&L INVESTMENT CO. SHORT -FORM PCD 4. Location: At the northwest corner of the I-30 access road and Wanda Lane 5. owner/Ap-plicant: Perry Gravitt 6. Existing Status: PCD 7. Proposed Use: Commercial, retail, and office uses as listed in the C-3, C-1, and 0-1 zoning district use categories 8. Staff Recommendation: Approval 9. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval 10. Conditions or Issues Remaining to be Resolved: None 11. Right-of-way Issues: None 12. Recommendation Forwarded With: 8 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent, and 0 abstentions 13. Objectors: None 14. Neiahborhood_Plan: Geyer Springs West (15) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING MODIFICATIONS TO A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TITLED P&L INVESTMENT CO. AMENDED SHORT -FORM PCD (Z -4016-D), AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE I-30 ACCESS ROAD AND WA.NDA LANE IN THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 14,695 AND CHAPTER 36, SECTION 36-176 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That Ordinance No. 14,895 be amended to provide for modification of the District described as P&L INVESTMENT CO. SHORT -FORM PCD (Z -4016-C). SECTION 2. That the revised Site Development Plan be approved as recommended by the Little Rock Planning Commission. SECTION 3. That the maintenance of the zoning classification for P&L INVESTMENT CO. AMENDED SHORT -FORM PCD is conditioned upon obtaining final plan approval within the time specified by Article VII, Section 36-454(d), Chapter 36 of the Code of Ordinances. SECTION 4. That the map referred to in Chapter 36-81. and 36-82, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, and the designated district map be and it is hereby amended to the extent and in the respects necessary to affect the designated change provided for in Section 1 hereof. SECTION 5. That this ORDINANCE shall take effect and be in full force upon final approval of the plan. PASSED: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: Mayor FILE NO.: Z -4016-D NAME: P&L INVESTMENT CO. -- AMENDED SHORT -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: At the northwest corner of I-30 access road and Wanda Lane DEVELOPER: PERRY GRAVITT P&L INVESTMENT CO. 714 S. Ringo St. Little Rock, AR 72201 372-6596 AREA: 2 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS ZONING• PCD PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 CENSUS TRACT: 20.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Commercial A PCD for the site was approved in Ordinance number 14,895, passed on June 4, 1985, after the Planning Commission recommended approval in a public hearing held on May 14, 1985. Included in the approval of the PCD was the requirement that the rear/north 7,800 square foot portion of the strip center be used for office uses. By letter from the owner, dated May 9, 1985, the owner volunteered that this rear 7,800 square feet be designated for general office uses under the 0-1, quiet office designation, and the limitation was approved by the Planning Commission as a requirement of the approved plan. (The remainder of the center to the south was approved for C-3 uses.) Over the years, non -0-1 uses have begun to occupy this rear47,800 square foot portion of' the center, and zoning enforcement began enforcement action in the matter. The owner, donse?uently, has proposed that, in addition .to the 0-1 uses which were previously approved, this rear 7,800 square foot area be allowed to have C-11 neighborhood commercial, uses. No other change in the originally approved PCD is proposed. A. PROPOSALIREQUE5T: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for an amendment to an existing PCD to allow C-1, neighborhood commercial, uses in the rear/north portion of the existing strip center in addition to the previously approved 0-1, quiet office, uses. April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z -4015-D Continued C. [a EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing PCD is a strip shopping center with a mixture of C-3, C-1, and 0-1 uses. The rear 7,800 square feet is limited to 0-1, quiet office, uses, but, for instance, a book store is one of the tenants. Other non -0-1 uses are a cleaners pick-up station and a beauty -barber shop. In the past, it is reported that non -0-1 uses have included a video rental store. These are retail use, and are not permitted by right in the 0-1 district. The problem, though, as far as the neighbors are concerned, is a dance studio in the rear portion of the center. A dance studio is allowed by right in the 0-1 district, but the reported loud music, loitering, and alcohol consumption disturb the abutting residential neighbors. According to one neighbor, when the music starts, the dogs begin howling. The originally approved site plan shows the landscaping which was supposed to be installed. Practically all of the plantings are no longer in place. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: Engineering, Water Works, and Wastewater have no comments. Arkansas Power & Light Co. and Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Landscape review reports that the landscaping which was proposed and required in the original PCD approval has deteriorated. Landscaping is required to be reinstalled and to be properly maintained. ISS IIES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Zoning Enforcement has undertaken enforcement action to bring the uses in compliance with the approved PCD requirements. The rear 7.800 square feet is limited to 0-1, quiet office, uses, but retail uses occupy or have occupied this area. The applicant is seeking to amend the approved PCD to permit C-1, neighborhood commercial, uses. When the uses change, the parking requirements also change. That there is sufficient parking to meet the Ordinance requiremtns needs to be confirmed. The Planning staff reports that the site is in the Geyer Springs West Planning District, and the Plan recommends commercial uses. There is, in this request, no land use issue. 2 April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z-4016D(Continued? _ ^� E. ANALYSIS: The "Mystic Eye Book Store", which is not allowed in the 0-1 district does not appear to be a problem; a dance studio, which is allowed in the 0-1 district is, according to the neighbors, a nuisance. The minutes of the original May 14, 1985 Planning Commission suggest that "office" was the key word, and that "office" uses were the intended limitation. However, all uses by right in the 0-1 district were approved. It is, perhaps, more appropriate to limit the uses to those in the 0-1 and C-1 districts which are not offensive, and exclude uses such as a dance studio,%video store, etc. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the change in the PCD to permit limited C-1 uses such as: antique shop; bank or savings and loan office; book and stationery store; barber and beauty shop; camera shop; cigar, tobacco, and candy store; clothing store; custom sewing and millinery; drugstore or pharmacy; duplication shop; florist shop; furniture store; handicraft, ceramic, sculpture, or similar art work; hobby shop; jewelry store; key shop; general and professional office; tailor; or travel bureau. Staff also recommends excluding non -office uses from those approved in the 0-1 zoning district, and limit the approved uses in the 0-1 district to general and professional office uses. There should be a restriction on commercial uses to limit those uses to available parking. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 3, 1994) No one was present to present the proposal. Staff outlined the request and presented the items in the discussion outline. Since the deficiencies are minimal, and the request involves a change in the allowable uses, the Committee did not feel that the lack of attendance at the meeting was decisive. The Committee forwarded the request to the Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 22, 1994) Staff presented the item and briefly outlined the history of the request. The action establishing the PCD took place in 1985. At that time, C-3 uses were allowed in the front "leg" of the "L" -shaped building, and the rear portion of the "L" was restricted to 0-1 uses. The center has 18, 133 square feet of area, and the rear 7,800 square feet is limited to the 0-1 uses. 3 April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z -4016-D (Continued) The area restricted to 0-1 uses contains a "Dance America" dance studio, a book store, a cleaners pick-up station, a beauty shop, and a family service agency. There are two vacant lease spaces. A dance studio and the family service agency are permitted uses in the 0-1 zoning district. The book store, a cleaners pick-up station, and a beauty shop are not; they are C-1 uses. The "Dance America" manager, Mr. Lewis Ridgel, confirmed to staff that his facility is exclusively a place for adult ballroom dancing instruction; therefore, the dance studio is an approved use in the 0-1 district so long as it conforms to the definition of a dance studio contained in the Ordinance. Staff recommended approval of the request to allow limited "quiet" C-1 uses in the rear 7,800 square feet as outlined in the staff recommendation. Staff also reported that, since the center has 18,133 square feet of floor area, and provides 49 parking spaces on site, if the center is approved for all commercial uses, then the parking regulations would require 58 parking spaces. Staff reported that the applicant maintains that there is sufficient parking for the activity generated by the businesses occupying the center, especially with the Dance America clients utilizing the center primarily after other businesses close. Barbara Bonds, an attorney representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and reiterated that the applicant's purpose is to allow the C-1 uses which, over time, have crept into the Center to remain, and that the applicant could accept the staff recommendation that only specific C-1 uses, which would not be out of character with an office zone, be permitted. Mr. Donald Turney of 7605 Denise Dr. addressed the Commission. He introduced his next door neighbor, Mr. William Holley, of 7601 Denise. He presented to the Commission a petition containing approximately 46 names and representing 35 homes in the abutting neighborhood. He related that the neighborhood's concerns are the tranquillity and serenity of the neighborhood. This tranquillity and serenity is put at risk, and that since Dance America moved in, there has been a noticeable increase in the noise. If a dance studio is for the instruction of dance only, then, since Dance America is not limiting its activities to that it is not in compliance with the regulations; Dance America rents its space out for parties. Last Saturday night, Mr. Turney continued, there was still the "thump, thump, thump" of loud music coming from the Dance America studio at 3:00 in the morning. Mr. Turney related that he reported the conditions to the police, and the police were witnesses to a large number of people carousing in the parking lot, drinking, milling around, and getting "a snoot full". Drunk driver were seen leaving the center and going the wrong way on University Ave. Ever since University Center opened, there have been problems. There is a Pizza delivery business located in the front of the building, in the C-3 area, and they empty their dumpsters at 2:00 A:M. F41 April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z -4016-D Continued Mr. Turney complained that the clanging of the equipment and dumpster, coupled with the beeping from the O.S.H.A.-required beeper are disturbing and wake him and the other neighbors. He and others in the neighborhood want to get piece and quiet back, and oppose allowing more commercial uses. He continued that the neighbors have no problem with business uses in the Center, but that Dance America is a problem; that 3:30 is too late to be instructing people how to dance. He charged that the Dance America business is being uses as a social club, and that the dance studio is a cover for other functions. Mr. Bonds responded that the dance studio should not be an issue, since a dance studio is permitted in the 0-1 zone. She added that the owners of the Center have no complaints on file from any neighbor; but, she suggested, that if a nuisance is being created, the owners of the Center can take care of such a problem; that there are conditions in the lease which can be enforced. Commissioner Oleson asked if zoning enforcement personnel could confirm whether Dance America was in compliance with the definition of a dance studio. Staff responded that enforcement officers could visit the location after hours to verify whether or not the Dance America conformed to the 0-1 use. Ms. Oleson asked how non -0-1 uses were allowed in the Center. Staff indicated that, over time, these uses have crept in; that, sometimes, the Collector's office does not verify with Zoning before issuing a privilege license or allowing a change in location for an existing privilege license holder. Allowing such uses is a result of oversights, but in the present situation, the system worked, and a tenant had requested a privilege license and the Collector's office had denied the request. Consequently, the zoning enforcement office had become involved. As a result of the enforcement action, the applicant was seeking approval of the uses which would permit the existing tenants to remain. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles added that he would relay to the Collector's office a need to coordinate better with Zoning in issuing privilege licenses. Chairperson Chachere asked for a listing of the types of uses which would be allowed in the C-1 zoning district. Ms. Bonds, reading from the Ordinance list, responded that barber and beauty shops; camera stores; cleaners pick-up station, and the like would be allowed, and that the neighbors are not objecting to these types of uses. 5 April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: z -4016-D Continued Mr. Giles continued the reading from the list of permitted uses: an antique shop; banks and savings and loan offices; daycare; nurseries; and others which would not be noisy or be intense uses. Ms. Chachere asked whether, if the PCD were amended, some uses could be excluded. Mr. Giles responded that uses can be excluded and the PCD can be conditioned on complying with the Commissions limitations. Mr. Bonds replied that the applicant is requesting approl-al of only specific C-1 uses, primarily to allow the existing book store, cleaners pick-up station, and beauty shop to remain. Commissioner Nicholson observed that originally the plan was for a mixed office and commercial center; but, if the C-1 uses are allowed in the rear portion of the center, then the Center becomes a 100% commercial center, without the mixture of office and commercial. Commissioner Oleson suggested that the existing zoning uses be left in place, and that zoning enforcement should enforce the Ordinance. Ms. Bonds responded that such a position would penalize the small operations, the book store, cleaners, and beauty shop, that are not causing the problem, but would leave the dance studio alone which is causing the problem. Commissioner Oleson said that the PCD was approved and the neighborhood had been assured that the rear portion of the building would be 0-1 uses; that the neighbors can't trust the zoning if the agreement is not maintained. Commissioner Putnam asked if a PCD can be canceled. Mr. Giles responded that it can, but that staff would need to research the provisions for doing so; that the City has only canceled PCD's if they have not been acted on to implement them, but, he did not believe, the City had canceled any previously for violating the provision of the PCD. He suggested that, perhaps, the appropriate procedure was for zoning enforcement to seek a remedy in the courts for violating the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Walker asked Ms. Bonds for information. on the square footage of the various uses in the rear 7,800 square feet of area zoned for 0-1 uses. Ms. Bonds indicated that Dance America takes 2,400 square feet, plus the family service agency leases an additional 900 square feet. n April 5, 1994 LE NO.: 7.-4016-P (Conti Mr. Walker continued that the area in question, then, is 4,000 square feet, less the vacant space. Therefore, he concluded, the 0-1 area which is in compliance with the 0-1 uses is about one-half of the area, and that perhaps the applicant should consider asking for a mixture of C-1 and 0-1 uses in the rear 7,800 square feet, with one-half of the area being allowed for each type use. This would retain the mixture of office and commercial uses. Ms. Bonds responded that the owner would agree to that type condition, and would agree to seek as tenants no additional non -0-1 uses; that the owner requested that the existing' - non -conforming uses be allowed to remain. Commissioner Woods asked if the Commission could place restrictions on the dance studio? He added that dance studios are for instruction; not a place to have parties at 1:00, 2:00, or 3:00 in the morning. Ms. Bonds replied that the Center owner would concede to the establishment of hours of operation and for a prohibition of the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the property. She reported that P&L Investment can enforce such provisions by way of the lease provisions. Staff interjected that a change in use brings with it a change in the parking and signage requirements. Mr. Turney said that if P&L Investment moves Dance American into the C-3 area of the Center, it only moves the problem down to be a nuisance to other neighbors; that "by 8:00 tonight", Dance America will get "cranked -up" and "it will be 1:00 or 1:30 before they go home". Chairperson Chachere asked Ms. Bonds for a suggestion on the hours of operation which might be imposed. Ms. Bonds responded that, since Dance America is an adult dance studio, its business was conducted primarily in the evening, but that 9:00 or 10:00 was acceptable, 10:00 being preferable. Commissioner Nicholson complained that there was insufficient information to make a determination at this time. Commissioner Putnam suggested that the item be deferred. Staff pointed out that, since this is an enforcement action, the deferral needs to be for a short time period, and suggested that the Commission continue the hearing at the April 5 Commission meeting. 7 April 5, 1994 NO.: 7,-4016-D (Continued A motion was made and seconded that the matter be deferred until the April 5, 1994 Commission hearing. The motion passes with the vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The application letter from the applicant, dated May 9, 1985, specifically asked for C-3 uses in the front portion of the building and for 110-1 office" zoning in the rear 7,800 square feet. The staff write-up for the May 14, 1985 Planning Commission hearing relates a proposal for the following "mixed use development": 7,405 square feet for office/wholesale; 2,928 square feet for retail; and 7,800 square feet for office. The Planning Commission action paragraph relates: "The applicant stated a commitment to 'C-3' type uses on (the front portion of the building) and office uses on (the rear 7,800 square feet of the building)." Whether there was any realization on the part of the applicant or the Commission at that time that 110-1" included other uses besides "office" is unclear. Section 36-458 of the Code of Ordinances deals with revocation of PUD's. There is no mechanism for revoking PUD's for violating the provisions of the PUD. The means of dealing with a problem are through enforcement of the Ordinance as any other violation of the Zoning Ordinance. As long as the allowable uses of the PCD are being "re -visited" by the Commission as a result of the applicant's request for a change in those uses, then the Commission should be able to look at the establishment of limitations for user/tenants; i.e., the setting of hours of operation of the Center and the establishment of hours for garbage pick-up. This is done routinely for PUD's. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 5, 1994) Staff reiterated the history of the approval of the existing PCD. Staff explained that the Center is an inverted "L" shaped building. Beginning at the front/south of the building, at the I-30 access road/University Ave., and going to the rear/north of the building, when the PCD was approved in 1985, the first 174 feet was approved for C-3 uses and the back 135 feet and the 100 feet of the east -west leg were restricted to 0-1 uses. In the 1985 Planning Commission minute record, the designation for the El April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z -4016-D (Continued) _ front 10,333 square feet of the Center was consistently referred to as a C-3 use area. In the discussion of the uses for the rear 7,800 square feet, which is the rear 135 feet of the north -south portion of the building and the entire east -west portion of the building, the term "office" uses was consistently used to describe the uses anticipated for this area; however, it is clear that the applicant specifically requested approval of all 0-1 uses for the rear 7,800 square feet. Staff noted that it is unclear whether there had been a realization at that time that the 0-1 zoning district includes such other activities as a dance studio. Staff outlined the existing uses of the Center, indicating that Dance America, Meadowcliff Hair Fashions, and Alpine Cleaners are in the north -south portion of the building; and, the Mystic Eye book store and the Family Service Agency are in the east -west portion of the building. All of these uses are in the area restricted to 0-1 uses. There are 2 vacant lease spaces in the 0-1 area of the building, one in each of the legs of the building. Dance America, as a dance studio, and the Family Service Agency, as an office, are appropriate uses in the 0-1 area. The Mystic Eye book store, the Alpine Cleaners, and the Meadowcliff Hair Fashions are not legitimate uses in the 0-1 district. Staff went on to say that the problem, though, is that Dance America has been the nuisance to the abutting neighbors, as was reported by the neighbor at the previous Commission meeting, with its loud music, late hours, alcohol, congregating in the parking lot, and drivers leaving the Center and driving the wrong way on University Ave/the I-30 access road. The beauty shop, book store, and cleaners are quiet uses and are not the problem to the neighborhood. Staff reiterated that another source of noise and disruption has been the practice of emptying a dumpster at 2:00 in the morning, again, a complaint voiced at the previous Commission meeting. The neighbor had complained, staff related, that the dumpster for the pizza delivery business which is in the C-3 use portion of the building, was being emptied at the late night -early morning hours. In light of this situation, staff recommended: 1) that a restriction be placed on the hours of operation of the center businesses and on the hours when the dumpster can be serviced; 2) that the allowable uses for the rear 7,800 square foot area should be amended to allow a mixture of 0-1 and C-1 uses, with the C-1 uses being restricted to antique shop, bank or savings and loan office, boot and stationery store, barber and beauty shop, camera shop, cigar or tobacco or candy store, clothing store, custom sewing and millinery, drugstore or pharmacy, duplication ship, florist shop, furniture store, handicraft or ceramic or sculpture or similar art work, hobby shop,'Jewelry 9 April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z -4016-D (Continued store, key shop, or travel bureau, and that the ratio to the 0-1 and listed C-1 uses be fixed at 50%; and 3) that it be made clear to the applicant that a dance studio is, according to the Zoning Ordinance, a place for "instructing, counseling, or coaching in the arts, developing personal skills and/or talents", and does not include leasing the studio for private parties, nor does it mean that it is a night club or bar, and that the music must not be so loud that it is heard outside the studio. Staff reported that in newspaper advertising for another dance studio, the ad had indicated that dancing was from 6:00 to 9:00 in the evenings. Since, at the previous Commission hearing, the applicant had indicated agreement with a proposal for a closing time for Dance America of 9:00 or 10:00, staff suggested that the hours of operation of the Dance America studio be set at 9:00 on weekdays and at 10:00 on weekends. Staff explained that with the 50% mix of office and listed C-1 uses in the rear 7,800 square feet, the beauty shop, cleaners, and book store would be made legitimate uses of the area, but their total square footage of lease space will not permit another C-1 use in that area; the 50% ratio is reached. The dance studio and family service agency, activities which are occurring at Dance America are beyond the scope of a "dance studio" as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. A dance studio is an approved use; Dance America, as it is operating, is apparently more than a dance studio and would not comply with the use restrictions in the existing or amended PCD. Barbara Bonds, an attorney representing the Center owner was present. She addressed the Commission, and introduced Mr. Perry Gravitt, one of the owners of the Center. Ms. Bonds reported that since the initial Commission hearing, the owners had: 1) contacted the dance studio and relayed to them that they must cease operations at 10:00 in the evenings, that they must cease the noise which constitutes a nuisance, and, that if they did not comply, they would be evicted; and 2) contacted the dumpster service company and stopped the late night servicing of the dumpster. Ms. Bonds reported that the owners had been in communication with Mr. Turney, who had made the presentation at the Commission meeting previously, and that he was satisfied that appropriate actions were being pursued which would correct the problems the neighbors had experienced. She also reported that Mr. Turney had said that he and the other neighbors were not opposed to the cleaners, book store, and beauty shop being in the area which was restricted to the 0-1 uses; that the neighbors were only concerned with the dance studio. She said that, since the Center owners were taking steps to abate the nuisance, she requested that the Commission recommend approval of the change in the PCD to allow the mixed office and limited commercial uses to continue. Commissioner Nicholson expressed concern that Dance America was not a legitimate "dance studio", as defined by the Ordinance; 10 April 5, 1994 FILE NO.: Z -4016-D_ (Continued that it was, in fact, a place to socialize. She said that in her mind, a dance studio is a place to learn ballet and so forth, and she did not want to legitimize what happening at the Dance America operation in the change in the PCD. Mr. Lawson responded that the effect of the staff's recommendation was to make Dance American conform to the Ordinance or be subject to enforcement action. He said that it is routine in PCD's to limit the hours of operation, and that this is what was being proposed by staff in this situation. Commissioner Nicholson, addressing Ms. Bonds, said that it looked to her like the Dance America people were playing with the definition in saying that "we teach dancing", but that the dancing is free. Perhaps, she said, the Ordinance definition -- needs to be strengthened. Ms. Bonds reiterated that the Center owners have a provision in the lease with the tenants which prohibits the tenants from operating unlawfully and from being a nuisance, and said that the owners will enforce the provisions. A motion was made and seconded to approve the amended PCD, as recommended. The motion carried with the vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent, and 0 abstentions. 11 n 12 C4 R2 GCMANY F cc0 Z n�,•L� LTJ • ���[� e. ma=y _ � ;_ j � }I ca 12 C4 R2 GCMANY F cc0 Z ;4' F'C,,.a::Y FENc:E 3V I�D --S1TE . lop r 78� � � �f�Kf l� C� • - 2928 use w� r A ` 74o5o :• -mt d n Z Q I V lGIN QTY MAP ,OO1 p L ZNUE�rMEI` Gof�PAN Y 141. P6,D Z- a x April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z -4016--D NAME: P&L INVESTMENT CO. -- AMENDED SHORT -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: At the northwest corner of I-30 access road and Wanda Lane DEVELOPER: PERRY GRAVITT P&L INVESTMENT CO. 714 S. Ringo St. Little Rock, AR 372-6596 AREA: 2 ACRES 72201 NUMBER OF LOTS: ZONING• PCD PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 CENSUS TRACT: 20.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Commercial A PCD for the site was approved in Ordinance number 14,895, passed on June 4, 1985, after the Planning Commission recommended approval in a public hearing held on May 14, 1985. Included in the approval of the PCD was the requirement that the rear/north 7,800 square foot portion of the strip center be used for office uses. By letter from the owner, dated May 9, 1985, the owner volunteered that this rear 7,800 square feet be designated for general office uses under the 0-1, quiet office designation, and the limitation was approved by the Planning Commission as a requirement of the approved plan. (The remainder of the center to the south was approved for C-3 uses.) Over the years, non -0-1 uses have begun to occupy this rear 7,800 square foot portion of the center, and zoning enforcement began enforcement action in the matter. The owner, consequently, has proposed that, in addition to the 0-1 uses which were previously approved, this rear 7,800 square foot area be allowed to have C-1, neighborhood commercial, uses. No other change in the originally approved PCD is proposed. A. PROPOSAL RE VEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for an amendment to an existing PCD to allow C-1, neighborhood commercial, uses in the April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C Continued FILE NO.: Z -4016-D rear/north portion of the existing strip center in addition to the previously approved 0-1, quiet office, uses. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing PCD is a strip shopping center with a mixture of C-3, C-1, and 0-1 uses. The rear 7,800 square feet is limited to 0-1, quiet office, uses, but, for instance, a book store is one of the tenants. Other non -0-1 uses are a cleaners pick-up station and a beauty -barber shop. In the past, it is reported that non -0-1 uses have included a video rental store. These are retail use, and are not permitted by right in the 0-1 district. The problem, though, as far as the neighbors are concerned, is a dance studio in the rear portion of the center. A dance studio is allowed by right in the 0-1 district, but the reported loud music, loitering, and alcohol consumption disturb the abutting residential neighbors. According to one neighbor, when the music starts, the dogs begin howling. The originally approved site plan shows the landscaping which was supposed to be installed. Practically all of the plantings are no longer in place. C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: Engineering, Water Works, and Wastewater have no comments. Arkansas Power & Light Co. and Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Landscape review reports that the landscaping which was proposed and required in the original PCD approval has deteriorated. Landscaping is required to be reinstalled and to be properly maintained. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL(DESIGN: Zoning Enforcement has undertaken enforcement action to bring the uses in compliance with the approved PCD requirements. The rear 7,800 square feet is limited to 0-1, quiet office, uses, but retail uses occupy or have occupied this area. The applicant is seeking to amend the approved PCD to permit C-1, neighborhood commercial, uses. When the uses change, the parking requirements also change. That there is sufficient parking to meet the Ordinance requiremtns needs to be confirmed. The Planning staff reports that the site is in the Geyer Springs West Planning District, and the Plan recommends commercial uses. There is, in this request, no land use issue. PA April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C Continued FILE NO.: Z -4015-D E. ANALYSIS• The "Mystic Eye Book Store", which is not allowed in the 0-1 district does not appear to be a problem; a dance studio, which is allowed in the 0-1 district is, according to the neighbors, a nuisance. The minutes of the original May 14, 1985 Planning Commission suggest that "office" was the key word, and that "office" uses were the intended limitation. However, all uses by right in the 0-1 district were approved. It is, perhaps, more appropriate to limit the uses to those in the 0-1 and C-1 districts which are not offensive, and exclude uses such as a dance studio, video store, etc. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the change in the PCD to permit limited C-1 uses such as: antique shop; bank or savings and loan office; book and stationery store; barber and beauty shop; camera shop; cigar, tobacco, and candy store; clothing store; custom sewing and millinery; drugstore or pharmacy; duplication shop; florist shop; furniture store; handicraft, ceramic, sculpture, or similar art work; hobby shop; jewelry store; key shop; general and professional office; tailor; or travel bureau. Staff also recommends excluding non -office uses from those approved in the 0-1 zoning district, and limit the approved uses in the 0-1 district to general and professional office uses. There should be a restriction on commercial uses to limit those uses to available parking. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 3, 1994) No one was present to present the proposal. Staff outlined the request and presented the items in the discussion outline. Since the deficiencies are minimal, and the request involves a change in the allowable uses, the Committee did not feel that the lack of attendance at the meeting was decisive. The Committee forwarded the request to the Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 22, 1994) Staff presented the item and briefly outlined the history of the request. The action establishing the PCD took place in 1985. At that time, C-3 uses were allowed in the front "leg" of the "L" -shaped building, and the rear portion of the "L" was restricted to 0-1 uses. The center has 18, 133 square feet of area, and the rear 7,800 square feet is limited to the 0-1 uses. The area restricted to 0-1 uses contains a "Dance America" dance 3 April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C Contirxued FILE NO.: Z -4016-D studio, a book store, a cleaners pick-up station, a beauty shop, and a family service agency. There are two vacant lease spaces. A dance studio and the family service agency are permitted uses in the 0-1 zoning district. The book store, a cleaners pick-up station, and a beauty shop are not; they are C-1 uses. The "Dance America" manager, Mr. Lewis Ridgel, confirmed to staff that his facility is exclusively a place for adult ballroom dancing instruction; therefore, the dance studio is an approved use in the 0-1 district so long as it conforms to the definition of a dance studio contained in the Ordinance. Staff recommended approval of the request to allow limited "quiet" C-1 uses in the rear 7,800 square feet as outlined in the staff recommendation. Staff also reported that, since the center has 18,133 square feet of floor area, and provides 49 parking spaces on site, if the center is approved for all commercial uses, then the parking regulations would require 58 parking spaces. Staff reported that the applicant maintains that there is sufficient parking for the activity generated by the businesses occupying the center, especially with the Dance America clients utilizing the center primarily after other businesses close. Barbara Bonds, an attorney representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and reiterated that the applicant's purpose is to allow the C-1 uses which, over time, have crept into the Center to remain, and that the applicant could accept the staff recommendation that only specific C-1 uses, which would not be out of character with an office zone, be permitted. Mr. Donald Turney of 7605 Denise Dr. addressed the Commission. He introduced his next door neighbor, Mr. William Holley, of 7601 Denise. He presented to the Commission a petition containing approximately 46 names and representing 35 homes in the abutting neighborhood. He related that the neighborhood's concerns are the tranquillity and serenity of the neighborhood. This tranquillity and serenity is put at risk, and that since Dance America moved in, there has been a noticeable increase in the noise. If a dance studio is for the instruction of dance only, then, since Dance America is not limiting its activities to that it is not in compliance with the regulations; Dance America rents its space out for parties. Last Saturday night, Mr. Turney continued, there was still the "thump, thump, thump" of loud music coming from the Dance America studio at 3:00 in the morning. Mr. Turney related that he reported the conditions to the police, and the police were witnesses to a large number of people carousing in the parking lot, drinking, milling around, and getting "a snoot full". Drunk driver were seen leaving the center and going the wrong way on University Ave. Ever since University Center opened, there have been problems. There is a Pizza delivery business located in the front of the building, in the C-3 area, and they empty their dumpsters at 2:00 A.M. Mr. Turney complained that the clanging of the equipment and dumpster, coupled with the beeping from the O.S.H.A.-required 4 April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C (Continued) FILE NO.: Z -4016-D beeper are disturbing and wake him and the other neighbors. He and others in the neighborhood want to get piece and quiet back, and oppose allowing more commercial uses. He continued that the neighbors have no problem with business uses in the Center, but that Dance America is a problem; that 3:30 is too late to be instructing people how to dance. He charged that the Dance America business is being uses as a social club, and that the dance studio is a cover for other functions. Mr. Bonds responded that the dance studio should not be an issue, since a dance studio is permitted in the 0-1 zone. She added that the owners of the Center have no complaints on file from any neighbor; but, she suggested, that if a nuisance is being created, the owners of the Center can take care of such a problem; that there are conditions in the lease which can be enforced. Commissioner Oleson asked if zoning enforcement personnel could confirm whether Dance America was in compliance with the definition of a dance studio. Staff responded that enforcement officers could visit the location after hours to verify whether or not the Dance America conformed to the 0-1 use. Ms. Oleson asked how non -0-1 uses were allowed in the Center. Staff indicated that, over time, these uses have crept in; that, sometimes, the Collector's office does not verify with Zoning before issuing a privilege license or allowing a change in location for an existing privilege license holder. Allowing such uses is a result of oversights, but in the present situation, the system worked, and a tenant had requested a privilege license and the Collector's office had denied the request. Consequently, the zoning enforcement office had become involved. As a result of the enforcement action, the applicant was seeking approval of the uses which would permit the existing tenants to remain. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles added that he would relay to the Collector's office a need to coordinate better with Zoning in issuing privilege licenses. Chairperson Chachere asked for a listing of the types of uses which would be allowed in the C-1 zoning district. Ms. Bonds, reading from the Ordinance list, responded that barber and beauty shops; camera stores; cleaners pick-up station, and the like would be allowed, and that the neighbors are not objecting to these types of uses. Mr. Giles continued the reading from the list of permitted uses: an antique shop; banks and savings and loan offices; daycare; nurseries; and others which would not be noisy or be intense uses. 67 April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C (continued_) FILE NO.: Z -4015-D Ms. Chachere asked whether, if the PCD were amended, some uses could be excluded. Mr. Giles responded that uses can be excluded and the PCD can be conditioned on complying with the Commissions limitations. Mr. Bonds replied that the applicant is requesting approval of only specific C-1 uses, primarily to allow the existing book store, cleaners pick-up station, and beauty shop to remain. Commissioner Nicholson observed that originally the plan was for a mixed office and commercial center; but, if the C-1 uses are allowed in the rear portion of the center, then the Center becomes a 100% commercial center, without the mixture of office and commercial. Commissioner Oleson suggested that the existing zoning uses be left in place, and that zoning enforcement should enforce the Ordinance. Ms. Bonds responded that such a position would penalize the small operations, the book store, cleaners, and beauty shop, that are not causing the problem, but would leave the dance studio alone which is causing the problem. Commissioner Oleson said that the PCD was approved and the neighborhood had been assured that the rear portion of the building would be 0-1 uses; that the neighbors can't trust the zoning if the agreement is not maintained. Commissioner Putnam asked if a PCD can be canceled. Mr. Giles responded that it can, but that staff would need to research the provisions for doing so; that the City has only canceled PCD's if they have not been acted on to implement them, but, he did not believe, the City had canceled any previously for violating the provision of the PCD. He suggested that, perhaps, the appropriate procedure was for zoning enforcement to seek a remedy in the courts for violating the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Walker asked Ms. Bonds for information on the square footage of the various uses in the rear 7,800 square feet of area zoned for 0-1 uses. Ms. Bonds indicated that Dance America takes 2,400 square feet, plus the family service agency leases an additional 900 square feet. Mr. Walker continued that the area in question, then, is 4,000 square feet, less the vacant space. Therefore, he concluded, the 0-1 area which is in compliance with the 0-1 uses is about G April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C Continued FILE NO.: Z -40.6-D one-half of the area, and that perhaps the applicant should consider asking for a mixture of C-1 and 0-1 uses in the rear 7,800 square feet, with one-half of the area being allowed for each type use. This would retain the mixture of office and commercial uses. Ms. Bonds responded that the owner would agree to that type condition, and would agree to seek as tenants no additional non -0-1 uses; that the owner requested that the existing non -conforming uses be allowed to remain. Commissioner Woods asked if the Commission could place restrictions on the dance studio? He added that dance studios are for instruction; not a place to have parties at 1:00, 2:00, or 3:00 in the morning. Ms. Bonds replied that the Center owner would concede to the establishment of hours of operation and for a prohibition of the consumption of alcoholic beverages on the property. She reported that P&L Investment can enforce such provisions by way of the lease provisions. Staff interjected that a change in use brings with it a change in the parking and signage requirements. Mr. Turney said that if P&L Investment moves Dance American into the C-3 area of the Center, it only moves the problem down to be a nuisance to other neighbors; that "by 8:00 tonight", Dance America will get "cranked -up" and "it will be 1:00 or 1:30 before they go home". Chairperson Chachere asked Ms. Bonds for a suggestion on the hours of operation which might be imposed. Ms. Bonds responded that, since Dance America is an adult dance studio, its business was conducted primarily in the evening, but that 9:00 or 10:00 was acceptable, 10:00 being preferable. Commissioner Nicholson complained that there was insufficient information to make a determination at this time. Commissioner Putnam suggested that the item be deferred. Staff pointed out that, since this is an enforcement action, the deferral needs to be for a short time period, and suggested that the Commission continue the hearing at the April 5 Commission meeting. A motion was made and seconded that the matter be deferred until the April 5, 1994 Commission hearing. The motion passes with the vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 0 absent. 6 April 5, 1994 ITEM NO.: C _ (Conti=edl FILE NO.: Z -4016-D STAFF UPDATE: The application letter from the applicant, dated May 9, 1985, specifically asked for C-3 uses in the front portion of the building and for 110-1 office" zoning in the rear 7,800 square feet. The staff write-up for the May 14, 1985 Planning Commission hearing relates a proposal for the following "mixed use development": 7,405 square feet for office/wholesale; 2,928 square feet for retail; and 7,800 square feet for office. The Planning Commission action paragraph relates: "The applicant stated a commitment to 'C-3' type uses on (the front portion of the building) and office uses on (the rear 7,800 square feet of the building)." Whether there was any realization on the part of the applicant or the Commission at that time that 110-1" included other uses besides "office" is unclear. Section 36-458 of the Code of Ordinances deals with revocation of PUD's. There is no mechanism for revoking PUD's for violating the provisions of the PUD. The means of dealing with a problem are through enforcement of the Ordinance as any other violation of the Zoning Ordinance. As long as the allowable uses of the PCD are being "re -visited" by the Commission as a result of the applicant's request for a change in those uses, then the Commission should be able to look at the establishment of limitations for user/tenants; i.e., the setting of hours of operation of the Center and the establishment of hours for garbage pick-up. This is done routinely for PUD's. 8 May 14, 1985 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 8 - File No. 383 NAME: LOCATION: DEVELOPER! Perry Gravitt 714 Ringo Little Rock, AR Phone: 374-8284 AREA: 2 acres P & L Investment Company "PCD" (Z -4016-C) Northwest corner of Wanda Lane at I-30 Access Road BUILDER/ARCHITECT: Tim Hopper 72201 NO. OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: "C -3"/"R-2" to "PCD" PROPOSED USES: Office/Retail/Wholesale VARIANCES REQUESTED: None. A. Site Histor On March 26, the Commission reviewed a request to rezone this site from "R-2" Single Family to "0-3" Office use. Due to intense neighborhood opposition demonstrated by the submission of a petition with over 100 signatures, the Commission felt that the PUD process would provide a better vehicle for review. On previous attempts in 1983 and 1984 to rezone to commercial, the applications were denied and in 1984 an opposing petition from the neighborhood was also submitted. The reasons for opposition were stated as a fear of undesirable commercial uses. Staff favored office development on the site due to its proximity to the residential area. B. Development Objectives 1. To develop the area as multi use, office, retail and wholesale projects on two acres. May 14, 1985 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 8 - Continued C. Proposal 1. A mixed use development including: Mark Use Size Unit No. A Office/Wholesale 7,405 SF 1 B Retail 2,928 SF 3 C Office 7,800 SF B TOTAL 18,123 SF 12 2. Construction will be prefabricated steel frame/roof masonry block walls on reinforced footing, and concrete expansion type flooring. D. Enqineerinq Comments 1. Driveway near intersection of Wanda and access road should be eliminated because it is too close to the intersection. 2. Four -foot planting strip between sidewalk and parking area. Parking on southern portion of Wanda Lane doesn't conform. Landscape strip also required along frontage road. 3. A 3 -foot landscape strip required along fence--on- the west property line if there is an access road along the west property line. E. Analvsis The applicant should submit additional information as required by the PUD process. Plans for landscaping/screening are required plus some indication of time involved in the development of the property. This plan shows a 4 -foot privacy fence. A 6 -foot fence is required along with a 40 -foot buffer on the adjoining residential areas. The service drive on the western boundary of the property is only 15 feet wide. Will this afford fire trucks and service vehicles adequate room? The applicant is asked to define the wholesale use proposed. F. Staff Recommendation Staff reserves comment until further information is received. May 14,'1985 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 8 - Continued SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was present. He was asked to submit a list of specific uses for the project and square footage so that parking requirements could be determined, talked to Water Works about a possible conflict between an easement and required landscaping, and clarified site plan by indicating a 6 -foot fence and buffer adjacent to residential area, showing landscaping and drive areas. Water Works - Require a 10 -foot easement adjacent to the north right-of-way of the access road. Acreage and frontage charges will apply. If a larger than. 2" connection is required, a tie-in between 6" and 8" mains in Wanda Lane will be required. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors. There was discussion relative to the necessity of Water Works' requirement of a 10 -foot easement that conflicted with - required landscaping. Mr. Dale Russom from Water Works' presented an explanation. After a question from the staff, the applicant stated a commitment to "C-3" type uses on Tracts A and B, and office unit on Tract C. A motion for approval was made subject to a commitment to the uses stated by the applicant and the 10 -foot easement. The motion passed by a vote of: 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.