HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4423-A Staff AnalysisJune 2, 1992
ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4423-A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Various Owners
Jim Moses/AMR Real Estate
Southwest Corner of Chenal
Parkway and Bowman Road
Rezone from R-2, MF -12, and
MF -18 to C-3
Commercial Development
42.43 acres
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North - Vacant and Commercial, zoned C-3
South - Vacant, zoned R-2 and PCD
East - Vacant and Single -Family, zoned R-2
West - Single -Family, zoned R-2
STAFF ANALYSIS
The property in question, 42 acres, is located at southwest
corner of Chenal Parkway and Bowman Road. The request is to
rezone the land to C-3 for future commercial development.
The site is currently zoned R-2, MF -12 and MF -18, with a
50 foot OS strip along a portion of the west property line.
The acreage is heavy wooded and the majority of it is
vacant; there are two single family residences that front on
Bowman Road. The site also has some significant grade
differences and increases in elevation from south to north.
Zoning in the area covers the full spectrum and includes
R-2, 0-3, C-3, I-2 and PCD. The most recent reclassifi-
cation in the immediate vicinity was to 0-3 and located at
the northeast corner of Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway.
Land use is a combination of residential, commercial, and an
AP&L facility, an industrial use. Throughout the area,
there are a number of vacant tracts, including several C-2
and C-3 parcels down along the parkway.
The site being considered for the rezoning has a long and
involved zoning history, dating back to the 1970's when a
portion of the site was rezoned to MF -12 as part of the
original Rock Creek Plan. In 1985, some of the land,
1
June 2, 1992
ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4423-A (Cont.
approximately 22 acres, was rezoned to MF -12 and MF -18. At
that time, the 50 foot OS strip was established along the
west side of the property. A C-3 request for 5 acres at the
northeast corner of the property was filed for in 1986. The
proposed commercial reclassification was endorsed by the
Planning Commission, but denied by the Board of Directors.
There was strong neighborhood opposition to the requested
rezoning. Another C-3 application was made in 1988 for the
same 5 acres, however, it was withdrawn prior to any review
by the Planning Commission. Staff's position on both
requests was denial of the commercial rezoning.
The I-430 District Plan shows 99% of the site for
multifamily use; the remaining 1%, a small triangular piece,
is identified for commercial use. Over the years, the
various land use plans have always shown the commercial
lands to be north of the Chenal Parkway. Therefore, the
adopted plan is consistent with other planning efforts done
for the area. At this time, the plan recommends a large
commercial area between the Chenal Parkway and West Markham
and a commercial node at Bowman Road and Kanis Road. Other
recommended land uses for the Chenal/Bowman Intersection
include office and single family.
Staff has never supported any commercial zoning south of the
parkway in this immediate vicinity, and the current request
is no exception. The adopted land use plan should be
maintained and a commercial reclassification of the site
should not be endorsed through this application. Approval
of a C-3 rezoning will significantly alter the direction of
the plan and could establish a precedent for the remaining
noncommercial corners.
Opening up 42 acres to C-3 could have a significant impact
on the adjoining residential neighborhood, and tends to be
in conflict with the concept of an attractive parkway
environment. (The most recent commercial reclassifications
along the parkway were to PCD.) A commercial rezoning
without benefit of additional review, such as a site plan,
could duplicate the development found on the northwest
corner, which should be avoided. Another major issue or
concern is the site itself and the topography which is
unique and must given careful consideration when deciding
the appropriate land use. A C-3 rezoning does not provide
the necessary scrutiny to determine whether a commercial
development can be done in harmony with the land and with
little disruption to the area. Traffic and access are other
important factors that must be studied before making a
decision on a commercial reclassification, and the lack of
the site plan does not permit this necessary review. From
2
June 2., 1992
ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4423-A (Cont.)
the preceding analysis, it is obvious that the site does not
lend itself to a C-3 rezoning, and any proposed reclassifi-
cation must be accomplished through a very detail review
process, such as a PUD.
Through a letter, the applicant has stated that the
development will agree to various restrictions and they
include:
Site Plan Review by the Planning staff
Integrated Development
Limited Curb Cuts
Internal Vehicular Circulation
Limited Outparcels
Lighting to Face Away from Neighbors
50 Foot OS Open Space Strip on West
25 Foot OS Open Space Strip on South
25 Foot Landscape Strip on South and
OS Strip
to West and South
Side
Side
West Abutting
Staff's position is that the above list needs to be made
part of a PCD/Site Plan Review to have any real value.
Also, the proposed restrictions are not enough to protect
the uniqueness of the site and the integrity of the
neighborhood.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
Bowman Road requires a right-of-way of 100 feet from the
centerline because of a proposed major redesign of the
intersection with the Chenal Parkway.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the C-3 rezoning request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(JUNE 2, 1992)
(Items No. 1 and 5 were discussed together; the propose plan
amendment, Item No. 5, was addressed first.)
Jim Moses, the applicant was present. There were approxi-
mately thirty individuals in attendance and one was opposed
to the proposed rezoning.
3
June 2, 1992
ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4423-A Cont.
Jim Lawson, Director of Neighborhoods and Planning,
addressed the effort that went into the plan amendment.
Mr. Lawson said that the staff decided to study the
Bowman/Chenal Parkway intersection based on new information
and projected traffic counts for the area.
Ron Newman, Planning Manager, discussed the land use plan
and said the plan amendment covers an area along Bowman
from Kanis Road to north of the Chenal Parkway. Mr. Newman
explained the proposed changes in detail, starting at
Kanis and moving northward. He indicated that staff was
recommending mixed office and commercial for the
Chenal/Bowman intersection. Mr. Newman then answered some
questions.
Jim Lawson reviewed an aerial photo of the area and then
proceeded to discuss the C-3 request (Item No. 1).
Mr. Lawson said that staff now supported the rezoning
because the applicant has agreed to a number of conditions
which makes the application similar to a PUD. Mr. Lawson
then reviewed the conditions as outlined in his May 29, 1992
letter to Jim Moses. Some of the conditions included:
50 foot OS strip on the west side
25 foot landscape area adjacent the OS
A total of 5 outparcels
5 curbcuts
Right -of -Way dedication - 20 feet on Bowman Road and
some at the intersection of Bowman and Chenal Parkway
Landscaping areas along Chenal Parkway and Bowman
No site work until the building permits were issued.
Mr. Lawson said that all of the conditions would be made
part of the C-3 Rezoning Ordinance. He stated that the
request was very close to a PUD. However, there was no
design or site plan. Mr. Lawson said that the homes to the
west would not be impacted because they were 20 feet higher
than the site.
There was a long discussion about various issues and several
questions were asked of Mr. Lawson.
Jim Moses said that the developers would deliver a quality
product, and things were being done the right way.
Mr. Moses went on to say that the location was very
important and there were very few sites that work in West
4
June 2, 1992
ITEM NO.: 1 Z -4423-A Cant.
Jim Fram, representing the Chamber of Commerce, read a
resolution from the chamber's Board of Directors in strong
support of the rezoning.
Jim Charles supported the C-3 request and discussed the
widening of Bowman Road. Mr. Charles asked the Commission
to change the plan for the entire intersection.
John Brooks said he built his house on Bowman in 1958 and
many things have changed over the last year. Mr. Brooks
described the area and said traffic was a problem. He said
the area was no longer desirable for residential use and
supports the C-3.
Bill Vancuren, a resident to the west, said he prefers
commercial to other uses and favors the C-3.
Bill Gunn spoke in support of the plan change and the
rezoning.
Richard Stephens, a resident at the northeast corner of the
Chenal Parkway and Bowman, said traffic was bad and supports
the plan change in rezoning.
Charles Lord and Charles Dunlap filled out cards, but did
not speak.
There was a long discussion about a number of the issues.
Jim Lawson responded to comments and said the rezoning
should only have a minimal impact on the parkway and other
arterials. Mr. Lawson told the Commission that
circumstances do change in an area, and when reviewing the
plan, the staff looked at the entire intersection.
Jim Moses spoke again and said that he favored the language
that says if there ever was a variation in the plan, the
issue would have to go back to the Commission.
Stephen Giles, City Attorney's Office, said the conditions
would be in the reclassification ordinance.
A motion was made to recommend approval of land use plan
amendment. The vote was 9 ayes, 1 nay, 0 absent and
1 abstention (Ramsay Ball).
A second motion was made to recommend approval of the C-3
rezoning with the conditions in the May 29, 1992 letter from
Jim Lawson to Jim Moses be made a part of the rezoning
ordinance. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays,
0 absent and 1 abstention (Ramsay Ball).
(A copy of the May 29, 1992 letter is attached.)
0
June 2, 1992
ITEM Na.: I Z -4423-A Cont.
Little Rock. He also indicated the site before the
Commission was the only good one. Mr. Moses said the
intersection was a natural commercial node because of the
traffic and then proceeded to describe the surrounding area.
Mr. Moses told the Commission that they worked with the
staff and the development could live with the conditions as
described by Mr. Lawson. He also said that meetings were
held with the neighborhoods to the east and west. Mr. Moses
said the project would be a quality development and would
fit into the area. He then stated that C-3 was needed to be
in place because a PUD or C-2 would prolong the process.
Mr. Moses told the Commission that the restrictions were
similar to a PCD. He then requested a variance reducing
the landscape strip along the Chenal Parkway from 60 feet
to 40 feet. Mr. Moses concluded by answering some questions
and said the site would be lowered from 510 feet to 490 feet
by relocating dirt on the property. Mr. Moses also added
that a large user usually has a floor to ceiling height of
20 to 25 feet.
Bob Brown, City's Plan Specialist, responded to the variance
request on the Chenal Parkway and said he was comfortable
with reducing the buffer to 40 feet.
Mr. Lawson answered some questions about the landscape
strip.
Jim Moses agreed to dedicating the necessary right-of-way
and adding a full lane on the Chenal Parkway. Mr. Moses
then responded to several questions. He said that the
proposed building would be approximately 200 to 300 feet
from the edge of the property, so there would be a large
area for staging trash pickup. Mr. Moses also said that he
was unsure of the exact location for the mechanical
equipment. However, they are sensitive to the issue and it
would be done in a tasteful way.
Mary Laurie, a resident on Pilgrim Road, submitted a
petition in support of the land use change and rezoning.
Ms. Laurie provided some background on the previous
commercial rezoning attempt in 1986, and said there was
strong opposition because the area had not been impacted by
the parkway. She told the Commission that a lot has changed
and she was living by one of the busiest intersections in
the city. Ms. Laurie then asked the Commission to modify
the plan and rezone the property.
Tim Irby expressed some opposition
and said that he was concerned with
the Chenal Parkway was a great road
maintain one east -west quarter that
traffic movement.
5
to the proposed rezoning
traffic. Mr. Irby said
and there was a need to
would not slow down
1. Meeting Date: July 7, 1992
2. Case No.: Z -4423-A
3. Recur est: Rezone from R-2, AF -12 and MF -18 to C-3 and OS
4. Location: Southwest corner of Chenal Parkway and
Bowman Road (42 acres)
5. Owner A licant: Various owners/Jim Moses
6. Existing Status: Vacant
7. Proposed Use: Commercial Development
8. Staff Recommendation: At the June 2, 1992 hearing, the
staff recommended approval of the C-3 rezoning with the
following conditions:
■ 50' "OS" Open Space strip adjacent to the west property
line
■ 25' landscape strip next to "OS" strip
■ 6' fence located back of "OS" strip
■ 8' landscape strip on south side of property with 6 foot
fence along R-2 property
■ A maximum of five outparcels on Bowman
■ A maximum of five curb -cuts (three for customer access,
two for service drives)
■ Interior lighting - 30' maximum poles, directional to east
and north and down to parking lot
■ 0' to..10' Right -of -Way dedication on Chenal as required by
Public Works
■ 20' Right -of -Way dedication on Bowman
■ Widen Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway
■ Internal circulation design
■ Underground utilities
■ Ground mounted signs to be either:
(1) One project monument identification sign along
Chenal to be 10 feet in height and 100 square feet
maximum and one (1) 28 feet high sign along Bowman
(450 square feet maximum); or
* 50' "OS" Open Space strip adjacent to the west property line
* 25' landscape strip next to "OS" strip
■ 6' fence located back of "OS" strip
■ 8' landscape strip on south side of property with 6 foot fence along
R-2 property
* A maximum of five outparcels on Bowman
■ A maximum of five curb -cuts (three for customer access, two for service
drives)
a Interior lighting - 30' maximum poles, directional to east and north
and down to parking lot
■ 0' to 10' Right -of -Way dedication on Chenal as required by Public Works
■ 20' Right -of -Way dedication on Bowman
d Widen Bowman Road and Chenal Parkway
* Internal circulation design
■ Underground utilities
■ Ground mounted signs to be either:
(1) One project monument identification sign along Chenal to be
10 feet in height and 100 square feet maximum and one (1)
28 feet high sign along Bowman (450 square feet maximum); or
(2) One project identification sign as in Item 1, and five (5)
ground mounted signs along the outparcels on Bowman, each
outparcel sign not exceeding 10 feet in height and 90 square
feet. The signs can be mounted on the berm; or
(3) A combination of Items 1 and 2 of which a maximum of 450 square
feet cannot be exceeded along Bowman Road.
■ An average of a 12 foot landscaped strip along Bowman Road with a berm
as required by the landscape ordinance.
■ An average of a 30 foot landscaped strip along Chenal Parkway with berm
as required by the landscape ordinance.
• Low level lighting (not to exceed 4 feet in height) behind the rear of
the buildings along the west property line.
• All landscaped areas shall be irrigated.
■ No excavation or tree clearance shall take place prior to the City's
approval of a grading plan for the site.
■ Building permits will be issued only in accordance with these
restrictions. Any substantial deviation from these restrictions may be
cause for a rehearing by the Board of Directors.
i
(2) One project identification sign as in Item 1, and
five (5) ground mounted signs along the outparcels
on Bowman, each outparcel sign not exceeding
10 feet in height and 90 square feet. The signs
can be mounted on the berm; or
(3) A combination of Items 1 and 2 of which a maximum
of 450 square feet cannot be exceeded along Bowman
Road.
■ An average of a 12 foot landscaped strip along Bowman with
a berm as required by the landscape ordinance.
• An average of a 30 foot landscaped strip along Chenal with
berm as required by the landscape ordinance.
• Low level lighting (not to exceed 4 feet in height) behind
the rear of the buildings along the west property line.
■ All landscaped areas to be irrigated.
■ No excavation or tree clearance shall take place prior to
the City's approval of a grading plan for the site.
■ All of the above restrictions offered by the developer
will be made a part of the rezoning C-3 ordinance adopted
by the City and filed of record.
■ Building permits will be issued only in accordance with
these restrictions. Any substantial deviation from these
restrictions may be cause for a rehearing by the Board of
Directors.
(The conditions were outlined in a May 29, 1992 letter from
Jim Lawson to Jim Moses, the applicant.)
9. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval of C-3 with
the conditions in Jim Lawson's May 29, 1992 letter to be
included in the reclassification ordinance. The applicant,
Jim Moses, agreed to all the conditions at the June 2, 1992
Planning Commission meeting.
10. Conditions or Issues Remaining to be Resolved: Dedication
of additional right-of-way for Bowman Road and the Chenal
Parkway.
11. Right -of -Way Issues: Bowman Road is a minor arterial and
requires an additional 20 feet of right-of-way to satisfy
the Master Street Plan standard. Chenal Parkway is an
expressway and Public Works will determine the amount of
additional right-of-way that is needed.
12. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays
0 absent and 1 abstention.
13. Objectors: One and he was concerned with traffic flow on
the Chenal Parkway. (There were a number of residents
present that supported the rezoning.)
14. Neighborhood Plan: I-430
ORDINANCE NO. 16,235
AN ORDINANCE RECLASSIFYING PROPERTY
LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK,
ARKANSAS, AMENDING SECTION 36 OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS; AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS,
SECTION 1. That the zone classification of the following
property be and is hereby changed from R-2, MF -12 and MF -18
to C-3:
Z -4423-A - Described as part of the NW 1/4 and the
SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 Section 4, T -1-N, R -13-W,
Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas, being more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the SW corner, NW 1/4, SW 1/4,
Section 4, T -1-N, R -13-W; thence N0002613011E 15.05
feet to the Point of Beginning; thence N00021'50"E
along the West line of the NW 1/4, SW 1.4 of said
Section 4 a distance of 1,213.03 feet to a point
on the Southerly Right -of -Way line of Chenal
Parkway; thence along said Southerly Right -of -Way
line of the Chenal Parkway the following courses:
Thence S50030'08"E 417.33 feet; thence along a
curve to the right have a radius of 1,405.68 feet
and a chord bearing and distance of S6700312411E
801.03 feet; thence S83036140"E 112.37 feet;
thence S6903413011E 103.08 feet; thence S3403113211E
39.70 feet; thence S0903312311E 145.60 feet; thence
S8903613311E 11.23 feet to a point on the West
Right -of -Way line of Bowman Road; thence along
said West Right -of -Way line of Bowman Road
S0002312711W 888.14; thence N89038108"W 421.70
feet; thence S46011100"W 252.46 feet; thence
SOG00710211W 21.49 feet; thence N89037112"W 21.99
feet; thence S4601213711W 316.56 feet; thence
N0002411111E 219.17 feet; thence N89015105"W 434.95
feet; thence N0000111811E 664.42 feet; thence
N8804212611W 39.99 feet to the Point of Beginning,
containing 42.43 acres, more or less. (Chenal
Parkway and Bowman Road)
Less and except a tract of land located in the
Southwest Quarter of Section 4, T -1-N, R -13-W,
Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas, more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the SW corner of the NW 1/4, SW 1/4,
Is Section 4, T -1-N, R -13-W; thence N0002613011E,
15.05 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence
N00°2115011E, 1,213.03 feet to a point on the
South Right -of -Way line of Chenal Parkway; thence
S5003010811E along the South Right -of -Way of Chenal
Parkway 64.46 feet; thence S0002115011W,
1,148.15 feet; thence S8804212611E, 39.85 feet;
thence S0000111811W, 688.95 feet; thence
N89°1510511W, 50.0 feet; thence N0000111811E,
664.42 feet; thence N8804212611W, 39.99 feet to
the Point of Beginning, containing 2.155 acres,
more or less from MF -12 Multifamily to OS Open
Space. (Chenal Parkway and Bowman Road)
SECTION 2. Subject to the following conditions proposed by
the applicant and which shall be covenants running with the land
to bind subsequent grantees of the property:
■ 50' "OS" Open Space strip adjacent to the west property
line
■ 25' landscape strip next to "OS" strip
■ 6' fence located back of "OS" strip
■ 8' landscape strip on south side of property with 6 foot
fence along R-2 property
■ A maximum of five outparcels on Bowman
■ A maximum of five curb -cuts (three for customer access,
two for service drives)
■ Interior lighting - 30' maximum poles, directional to east
and north and down to parking lot
■ 0' to 10' Right -of -Way dedication on Chenal as required by
Public Works
■ 20' Right -of -Way dedication on Bowman
■ Widen Bowman.Road and Chenal Parkway
■ Internal circulation design
■ Underground utilities
■ Ground mounted signs to be either:
(1) One project monument identification sign along
Chenal to be 10 feet in height and 100 square feet
maximum and one (1) 28 feet high sign along Bowman
(450 square feet maximum); or
(2) One project identification sign as in Item 1, and
five (5) ground mounted signs along the outparcels
on Bowman, each outparcel sign not exceeding
10 feet in height and 90 square feet. The signs
can be mounted on the berm; or
(3) A combination of Items 1 and 2 of which a maximum
of 450 square feet cannot be exceeded along Bowman
Road.
■ An average of a 12 foot landscaped strip along Bowman Road
with a berm as required by the landscape ordinance.
• An average of a 30 foot landscaped strip along Chenal
Parkway with berm as required by the landscape ordinance.
• Low level lighting (not to exceed 4 feet in height) behind
the rear of the buildings along the west property line.
• All landscaped areas shall be irrigated.
■ No excavation or tree clearance shall take place prior to
the City's approval of a grading plan for the site.
■ Building permits will be issued only in accordance with
these restrictions. Any substantial deviation from these
restrictions may be cause for a rehearing by the Board of
Directors.
SECTION 3. That the map referred to in Section 36 of the
Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock and designated
district map be and is hereby amended to the extent and in the
respects necessary to affect and designate the change provided
for in Section 1 hereof.
SECTION 4. That the ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force from and after its passage and approval.
PASSED: July 7, 1992
ATTEST• s/Robbie Hancock
City Clerk
APPROVED: s/Sharon Priest
Mayor