Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6062 Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-6062 NAME: McAlmont POD Revocation LOCATION: 1814— 1824 McAlmont Street OWNER: Renee Stehle 27 Crystal Mountain Lane Maumelle, AR 72113 OWNER: Ms. Wanda G. Mitchell 1020 G Street North Little Rock, AR 72114 AREA: 0.389 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Charitable or philanthropic organization PROPOSED ZONING: R-4, Two-family PROPOSED USE: Duplex Housing VARIANCESM/AIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 17,094 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on January 16, 1996, established Global Learning Community Services Center, Inc. Short -form Planned Office Development. The approval allow the utilization of three existing 1,200 square foot residential duplex structures as the support offices for, and facilities for services to the public for, the Global Learning Community Services Center. The northern -most duplex building was to be utilized for the office of the Center's crisis intervention hotline, for counseling, and for the food pantry operation. The center duplex structure was proposed to be the general offices of the center. The southern most duplex structure was proposed to house the youth center and the GED classroom. No changes to the structures was proposed, except for superficial remodeling and repair work, and no additional parking beyond the six residential style head -in parking FILE NO.: Z-6062 (Cont. spaces off McAlmont Street were proposed. The residential character of the site was to be maintained. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Per Section 36-458(a) Cause for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may recommend to the Board of Directors that any PUD or PD approval be revoked and all building permits or certificates of occupancy be voided under the following circumstances: (1) The applicant has not submitted a final development plan to staff. Where a staged development plan is approved the Board of Directors may revoke the entire preliminary plan or may revoke only that stage on which a final plan has not been submitted and approved. (2) Construction has not commenced within the time allowed. (3) The applicant has not adhered to the development schedule as stated in the approved preliminary plan. In addition, to the revocation for cause, Section 36-454(e) final development plan states the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. Request for extensions of time shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission which may grant one extension of not more than two years. Failure of the applicant to file a timely extension shall be cause for revocation of the PUD as provided in the ordinance. Per the ordinance requirement of the procedure for revocation, staff has contacted the applicant indicating the default of approval and setting a time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be made to totally or partially revoke the POD zoning classification. According to the ordinance, the Planning Commission shall provide a recommendation which shall be forwarded to the Board of Directors for disposition as in the original approval. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed; there are three duplex residential units on the site. The site is in a developed area, and the topography is nearly level. The zoning of the area to the north, south and west is primarily R-4, Two-family and has developed with a mix of one and two family residences. The units are currently occupied as residential. 1-30 abuts the site to the east. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The East of Broadway Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. 2 FILE NO.: Z-6062 Cont. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff feels the approval should be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff recommends the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the previously held R-4, Two-family zoning District be restored. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated they felt the approval of the POD should be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff presented a recommendation that the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the previously held R-4, Two-family zoning district be restored. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. M March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-6062 NAME: McAlmont POD Revocation LOCATION: 1814 — 1824 McAlmont Street OWNER: Renee Stehle 27 Crystal Mountain Lane Maumelle, AR 72113 OWNER: Ms. Wanda G. Mitchell 1020 G Street North Little Rock, AR 72114 AREA: 0.389 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING PROPOSED USE NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 -•o FT, NEW STREET: 0 LF Charitable or philanthropic organization R-4, Two-family Duplex Housing VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 17,094 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on January 16, 1996, established Global Learning Community Services Center, Inc. Short -form Planned Office Development. The approval allow the utilization of three existing 1,200 square foot residential duplex structures as the support offices for, and facilities for services to the public for, the Global Learning Community Services Center. The northern -most duplex building was to be utilized for the office of the Center's crisis intervention hotline, for counseling, and for the food pantry operation. The center duplex structure was proposed to be the general offices of the center. The southern most duplex structure was proposed to house the youth center and the GED classroom. No changes to the structures was proposed, except for superficial remodeling and repair work, and no additional parking beyond the six residential style head -in parking March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6062 spaces off McAlmont Street were proposed. The residential character of the site was to be maintained. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: Per Section 36-458(a) Cause for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may recommend to the Board of Directors that any PUD or PD approval be revoked and all building permits or certificates of occupancy be voided under the following circumstances: (1) The applicant has not submitted a final development plan to staff. Where a staged development plan is approved the Board of Directors may revoke the entire preliminary plan or may revoke only that stage on which a final plan has not been submitted and approved. (2) Construction has not commenced within the time allowed. (3) The applicant has not adhered to the development schedule as stated in the approved preliminary plan. In addition, to the revocation for cause, Section 36-454(e) final development plan states the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. Request for extensions of time shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission which may grant one extension of not more than two years. Failure of the applicant to file a timely extension shall be cause for revocation of the PUD as provided in the ordinance. Per the ordinance requirement of the procedure for revocation, staff has contacted the applicant indicating the default of approval and setting a time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be made to totally or partially revoke the POD zoning classification. According to the ordinance, the Planning Commission shall provide a recommendation which shall be forwarded to the Board of Directors for disposition as in the original approval. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed; there are three duplex residential units on the site. The site is in a developed area, and the topography is nearly level. The zoning of the area to the north, south and west is primarily R-4, Two-family and has developed with a mix of one and two family residences. The units are currently occupied as residential. 1-30 abuts the site to the east. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The East of Broadway Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be 2 March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff feels the approval should be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff recommends the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the previously held R-4, Two-family zoning District be restored. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated they felt the approval of the POD should be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff presented a recommendation that the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the previously held R-4, Two-family zoning district be restored. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 3 NAME: City Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City District LOCATION: West of I-30 between 18th and 19th Streets REQUEST: Single Family to Public Institutional SOURCE: Staff - Z-6062 STAFF REPORT• As part of a staff review for a rezoning request, the City Land Use Plan in the area was reviewed. The Plan recommends Single Family for the site. The proposal is for an Institutional use - Public Service, outreach. If there are no traffic problems created by the Public Use, Staff has typically not opposed a Public Use in a Single Family area. That is from a land use standpoint Staff usually does not oppose new Public uses. In this case the use is along an interstate freeway and has no access to neighborhood residential streets. Therefore, there should be no major traffic issue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, to Public Institutional FILE NO.: Z-6062 NAME: GLOBAL LEARNING COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER, INC. -- SHORT-FORM PLANNED OFFICE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: At 1814-16, 1818-20, and 1822-24 McAlmont Street DEVELOPER: Shirley Ann Marshall GLOBAL LEARNING COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER, INC. 1608 S. Rock St. Little Rock, AR 72206 375-2430 AREA: 0.389 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT_ NEW STREET: ZONING: R-4 PROPOSED USES: PLANNING DISTRICT: 8 CENSUS TRACT: 4 VARIANCES RE VESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: Establishment of a charitable or philanthropic organization The applicant proposes a Planned Office Development in order to use three existing, 1,200 square foot, residential duplex structures as the support offices for, and facilities for services to the public for, the Global Learning Community Services Center. It is proposed that the northern -most duplex building be used for the office of the Center's crisis intervention hotline, for counseling, and for the food pantry operation. The center duplex structure is proposed to be the general offices of the Center. The southern -most duplex structure is proposed to house the youth center and the GED classroom. No changes to the structures are proposed, except for superficial remodeling and repair work, and no additional parking beyond the 6 residential style head -in parking spaces off McAlmont St. are proposed. The site is proposed to be landscaped, and it is proposed to retain the residential character of the site. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review by the Planning Commission and a recommendation of approval to the Board of Directors is requested for a Planned Office Development for the site. FILE Z-6062 Contin° d B. C. M EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed; there are three duplex residential units on the site. The site is in a developed area, and the topography is nearly level. The existing zoning of the site is R-4, with R-4 zoned property lying to the north, south, and west. I-30 abuts the site to the east. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comments that a site plan, showing driveways and parking area, must be submitted for review. Little Rock Water works has no comments. Little Rock Wastewater Utility comments that there are existing sewer mains on the site which serve the existing buildings. Arkansas Power and Light Co. approved the submittal. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. approved the submittal. The Little Rock Fire Department approved the submittal. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: The Planning staff comments that the site is in the Central City District, and that the adopted Land Use Plan recommends "Single Family" uses for the area. The character of the proposed organization is, however, a quasi -public use, involving support office uses for and services to the public. The "Public -Institutional" ("PI") use designation is appropriate for this type use, and the Planning staff recommends a change in the Land Use Plan to "PI" for this site. Sec. 36-502 specifies the required off-street parking. If the use is considered "office", then 3 spaces per building, or a total of 9 off-street parking spaces is required. The applicant, however, has requested approval of the site "as is", approving the 6 head -in parking spaces which exist on the site. The Site Plan Review Specialist notes that a 6 foot high opaque wood fence, with its face directed outward, or dense evergreen plantings, are required along the northern and eastern property lines. 2 FILE NO • Z-6062 (Continued) E. ANALYSIS: The proposed use is in conformance with the emerging character of the area. There is a large C-3 zoning district about a block to the south; Rockefeller School is a block to the north; and I-30 abuts the site to the east. Much of the land area to the south, along I-30 is vacant. The applicant explains that their service is, primarily, to homeless and needy persons in the neighborhood, and that there is very little vehicle traffic to the facility. There is, explains the applicant, little need for additional parking spaces, and, due to the light traffic which the Center generates and which uses McAlmont St., the head -in, residential style, parking is sufficient. Additionally, the applicant explains that the residential character of the site needs to be retained for the benefit of the clientele who will be served at the Center. The applicant requests approval of the planned development site plan, without a requirement to provide commercial style off-street parking. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the planned development, as presented. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 22, 1995) No one was present. Staff explained that, since the proposed development is, primarily, a "use" issue, with no physical changes to the buildings or site being proposed, staff had not required the applicant to be present. David Scherer and Bill Henry, with the Public works staff, indicated that, if traffic becomes a problem, "No Parking" signs will be erected along McAlmont St. The Committree forwarded the item to the full Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 12, 1995) Staff presented the proposed POD requested, noting that staff supports the proposed land use but has concerns that the only off-street parking are the six residential style head -in parking places which are associated with the three duplex residences. Staff reported that there is an unopened right-of-way abutting the property on the south, and that the applicant could initiate a petition to abandon the right-of-way and would, if the abandonment were successful, gain one-half the right-of-way land area, which could be useful in providing additional off-street parking spaces to meet off-site parking requirements. 3 FILE NO.: Z- 62 ontinra d Staff reported that the adopted Land Use Plan recommends "Single Family Residential"; however, that staff can support a change in the Land Use Plan for the site to "Public/Institutional". Staff recommended approval of a Land Use Plan amendment for the Central City District for the site to Public/Institutional use. Ms. Shirley Marshall, the applicant was present. She explained the various uses proposed for the three duplex buildings, and noted that, almost exclusively, persons who utilize the services provided by her agency do not come to the agency by automobile; they are children from the immediate neighborhood, or are adults who do not have automobiles who are homeless, are unemployed, or are in need of substance abuse counseling. She said that the six parking spaces should be adequate. Staff reported that, if parking on MCAlmont becomes a problem, then the City Traffic Engineer will have to have "No Parking" signs erected along the street. No one was present in objection to the proposed use, and staff reported that no one had called staff or sent in letter in opposition to the proposed use. Commissioner Rahman reported that, as the representative of the School Board, he had notified the School Board of the proposed POD use, noting its proximity to the Rockefeller School campus, but that he had received no response from the School Board expressing any concern. The question was called, and a recommendation of approval of the POD was approved with the vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 1 absent. 4