HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4175-J Staff AnalysisFebruary 26, 2015
ITEM NO.: 9
NAME: Arkansas Hospice Long -form POD Revocation
LOCATION: North end of Dover Drive, north of West 36th Street
Richsmith Holdings, LLC
9800 Maumelle Blvd.
North Little Rock, AR 72113
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 9.61 acres
CURRENT ZONING
ALLOWED USES:
PROPOSED ZONING
PROPOSED USE:
VARIANCE/WAIVERS:
BACKGROUND:
NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
POD
Hospice Facilities
MF -18
Multi -family
None
FILE NO.: Z-4175-1
FT. NEW STREET: 0 FT
On August 1, 1995, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance no. 16,939 rezoning the
site from MF -18 to POD for development of the Hospice Home Care (Arkansas
Hospice) facilities. The multiple building site plan included the following:
• office building
■ two (2) impatient care facility buildings
• chapel building
■ childcare building
• medical equipment building
• grounds maintenance building
February 26, 2015
ITEM NO.: 9 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-4175-1
future additional impatient care facility building site
122 parking spaces
No development began during the official time frame for submission of a final
development plan and the previously approved POD officially expired.
On April 19, 2001, the Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request to
reestablish the POD zoning for the site and to allow the development to take place as a
two-phase development. As was previously requested, the applicant proposed to
develop the site to accommodate residential inpatient care for the terminally ill. The
phases included the development of Arkansas Hospice Offices (21,406 square feet) and
an inpatient care facility (24,385 square feet and 20 beds). The second phase of the
development included construction of an additional 21,000 square foot inpatient care
facility (20 beds) a chapel and maintenance building. The applicant indicated all
building design would be residential in character. The Little Rock Board of Directors
approved the proposed development plan by the adoption of Ordinance No. 18,497 on
June 5, 2001.
On March 11, 2004, the Commission approved a two-year time extension on the POD.
That time extension has expired. The Hospice development took place elsewhere. The
property owner has stated the site will not be developed as was approved under -the
POD and is requesting revocation of the POD. The zoning will revert to the underlying
MF -18.
A. PROPOSAUREQUEST/APPLICANT'S STATEMENT:
Per Section 36-454(d) the owner of an approved PD or PUD may, for cause,
request repeal of the ordinance establishing the development when it has been
determined that the development will not occur. A written request may be filed
with the City staff at any time up to three (3) years after the date of adoption of
the ordinance creating the PUD or PD. The request shall set forth the cause of
the repeal.
According to the ordinance, the Planning Commission recommendation on the
repeal request shall be forwarded to the Board of Directors for their
consideration. The board of directors may grant or deny the request or return the
request to the planning commission for further study. If the request is approved,
an ordinance shall be adopted repealing the PUD or PD.
The owner has stated the development will not occur as planned. The owner is
requesting the POD zoning be revoked and the MF -18 Zoning District zoning be
restored.
E
February 26, 2015
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.)
B. EXISTfNG CONDfTfONS:
LE NO.: Z-4175-1
The site is undeveloped and heavily wooded. A nursing home is located to the
north. A church is adjacent to the south. The Our Way multifamily development
is located to the west. The park adjacent to the east is owned by the Kensington
Park Homeowners Association.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
property owner and his representatives have been meeting with neighborhood
representatives and apparently there is no disagreement with the proposed
revocation.
D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the
previously held MF -18 zoning be restored.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(FEBRUARY 26, 2015)
The applicant was present. There was one objector present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval.
Tim Daters, representing the applicant, stated the revocation was requested to allow
for development of a portion of the site for a senior housing project.
Jennifer Bartlett, of National CORE, stated her organization proposed to develop
Magnum Opus Phase I, a fifty-one (51) unit senior housing apartment community on
the site. She said they had been through the several other phases of the approval
process for such a project and this was the final step necessary. Ms. Bartlett stated the
$7.6 million project would occupy 2.76 acres of the site. She stated time was running
out on the process, including access to grant funds.
Larry Bledsoe, president of the Kensington Place POA, spoke of his neighborhood's
concerns about opening up the entire site to MF -18 zoning. He stated the site was
adjacent to the POA's private park and lake. Mr. Bledsoe stated the property owner,
Keith Richardson, had met with a group of the neighborhood's property owners. He
said the neighborhood recognized the need for elderly housing but the proposed
development was only using a portion of the overall site. Mr. Bledsoe expressed
concerns about traffic and asked that the developer consider alternative access to the
site. He asked the commission to defer the item to allow for further discussions to take
place. He asked what assurances there were that the property would be developed with
elderly housing. In response to a question from Chairman Dillon, Mr. Bledsoe suggested
alternative access could possibly be gained through the properties to the north, to
3
February 26, 2015
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4175-1
Aldersgate Road. He reiterated his concerns about the impact of the development on
the POA lake and again asked that the item be deferred.
Director of Planning and Development Tony Bozynski stated the issue before the
commission was the revocation of an expired POD, not a potential future development.
Tim Daters stated there was not enough time to defer the item and meet the timeline
necessary for CORE's funding approvals. He stated the property owner was interested
in meeting again with the neighborhood. Mr. Daters noted that Dover Drive was a
collector street.
In response to questions from Commissioner Finney, Mr. Bozynski described the
procedure necessary to revoke an expired POD. He also stated the item was being sent
to the March 3, 2015 Board of Directors' meeting to accommodate the applicant's short
time line.
Commissioner May stated he did not think a deferral was unreasonable.
Mr. Bledsoe stated the neighborhood has supported the previous Hospice development
over the site being developed as multi -family, He stated the POD zoning was the only
thing protecting the neighborhood form the property being developed as multi -family.
In response to a question form Chairman Dillon, Mr. Bledsoe stated the neighborhood
had met with Mr. Richardson the -previous Tuesday.
Commissioner May commented that the item still had to go to the Board of Directors
and the neighborhood could address their concerns to the Board.
Commissioner Bubbus said the Board could decide if they wanted to defer the request.
Tim Daters stated the commission would see this property again prior to any
development; as a preliminary plat and/or a multiple building site plan review.
Commissioner Brock told Mr. Bledsoe there would be time to meet with the developer
prior to any development occurring on the site.
A motion was made to approve the revocation request. The motion was approved by a
vote of 7 ayes, 1 no, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
0