Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5404 Staff AnalysisMay 7, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A FTLE NO• Z-5404 NAME: Brumbelow - Short -Form PCD LOCATION: 13200 W. Markham DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• DWIGHT BLISSARD 10310 W. Markham, Suite 193 Little Rock, AR 72205 221-9999 AREA: `0.78 Ac. NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: 0-3 PROPOSED USES: PCD - Office, Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT: Rock Creek Valley - 17 CENSUS TRACT: 4207 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: It is the developer's desire to create a situation that would allow him all 11C-3" users for the vacancies in the existing building as well as all bays in the planned second phase. 13,200 West Markham is an existing one -level, brick and glass building located on the northwest corner of West Markham and Old Town Road. The existing phase of the building contains a total of 4,225 sq. ft. The second phase of the building will contain 5,600 sq. ft. A. PROPOSALIREQUEST: This application involves a single lot zoned 110-3" with existing parking and building to be rezoned for all 11C- 3" users. Although this is a "PCD" application, it does not fully clarify the use composition of the building. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This site is currently occupied by office building. All street improvements are in place. 1 May 1, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. A Continued FILE NO: Z -54 x4 C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: No engineering review comments. D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN: The Staff would point out one significant issue concerning this proposal, that is its nonconformity with the adopted land use plan for the area. This subdivision plat, when approved by the Planning Commission, was approved for office development. Last year, east side of the Old Town Road was reclassified to commercial zoning. The Planning Staff felt that zoning action was a recognition of a need to move the commercial zoning line on the plan from its old location to Old Town Road as a new west boundary. The approval of this project would extend commercial activity west of Old Town Road. E. ANALYSIS: The Planning Staff view entirely inappropriate area. Staff feels that continue stripping out activity. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: of this proposal is that it is given the land use plan for this approval of this PCD would only of the Parkway as retail Staff recommends denial of this application. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING (January 31, 1991) Mr. Blissard was present. He stated that he has submitted a letter modifying his original application which was asking to allow C-3 users in four bays, C-1 users in two bays and 0-3 users in two bays. Staff pointed out that it felt this issue was a land use matter and needs to be discussed by the full commission. There were no other issues of concern discussed by the Committee. The item was passed to the full commission without additional comment. 2 May 7, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. A Continued FILE NO: 2-5404 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (February 12, 1991) Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred because of the notice deficiency. A motion was made to defer the issue to the February 26, 1991, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (February 26, 1991) Staff informed the Commission deferred because of the notice made to defer the issue to the motion was approved by a vote absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION that the item needed to be deficiency. A motion was March 26, 1991, meeting. The of 8 ayes, 0 nays, and 3 (March 26, 1991) There were several objectors in attendance. The application was represented by Mr. Dwight Blissard and Billy Brumbelow. The Planning Staff presented its recommendation of denial. The Chairman then asked Mr. Blissard to present his application. Mr. Blissard offered a lengthy presentation wherein he described the location and existing building. He also stated that as a leasing agent for Mr. Brumbelow he had a difficult time finding tenants for office use, but he has received a lot of phone calls from commercial users. A lengthy discussion of the PCD followed with several Commissioners asking questions about proposed uses and the size of the building. Mr. Blissard and Mr. Brumbelow responded that tenants would be partly office, partly commercial but they did not have any specific users at this time. The Commissioner Chairperson then asked the first listed objector present, Mrs. Pat Heins, to present her position. Mrs. Heins indicated that she is concerned about the increase in noise and traffic for residents of the Shadow Lake Apartment Complex. The Chair then recognized the next listed objector present, Mrs. Ruth Bell, representing the League of Women Voters, stated that the League supports the zoning boundary and land use plan and feels that the proposed application should be rejected. 3 May'7, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. A Continued FILE NO: Z-5404 A lengthy discussion of the PCD followed involving several of the Commissioners, applicant, and Planning Staff. It was determined that the application needs to be deferred for six weeks to allow the applicant to narrow down the specific uses. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 1 nay, and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (May 7, 1991) The applicant was present as was his agent, Mr. D. Blissard. The Planning staff presented its recommendation of denial of the proposal. The chairman asked Mr. D. Blissard to present his case. Mr. Blissard stated that his client has amended the application again and this time they are asking the Planning Commission to allow them all items listed under conditional uses and accessory uses in 0-3 zoning. Commissioner Oleson objected to allowing conditional uses and reminded the Commission that the history of the commercial line is being moved further west. The chairman then asked Jim Lawson, Planning Director, to review Mr. Blissard's proposal and to present the Planning Staff's position of the proposal. Jim Lawson from the Planning Staff suggested that 1,375 sq. ft. or one bay can be used as an accessory use and the conditional uses be permitted as listed fielow: ` 2328 (63 1. Animal clinic (enclosed) 2. Barber and beauty shops 3. Health studio or spa 4. Office, showroom/warehouse 5. School (commercial, trade After a brief discussion of the was made to approve the PCD as by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 3 _ e� f,� -"m IZge 232Y(03) Cup or craft) proposed amendment, a motion amended. The motion passed absent and one open position. 4