Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6106 Staff AnalysisJune 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: David Henry Patrick McGetrick West side of Woodland Heights Road approximately 220 feet south of Summit Road Rezone from R-2 to 0-3 Future office development 8.05± acres SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single Family homes; zoned R-2 South - Christ the King Church and School; zoned R-2 and Easter Seal Offices; zoned 0-3 East - New St. Vincent Hospital project under construction; zoned 0-3 West - Church and single family homes; zoned R-2 and new multibuilding office development; zoned 0-3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS Woodland, Fairview and Summit require dedications of right- of-way to 30 feet from centerline for this commercial re- zoning according to City Ordinance. The corner of Woodland Heights Road needs a radius of 450 feet per the Master Street Plan unless a controlled intersection can be constructed. This street should be improved in concert with the Saint Vincent Site to provide for commercial access to Highway 10. The existing street is a substandard 18 foot chipseal road with poor sight distance. The streets are required to be 36 foot commercial streets with sidewalks on both frontages. The site will require a grading permit prior to clearing. Stormwater detention analysis will be required at time of construction. Location of drives will need review. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is in conflict with the Plan. The last Plan June 6, 1396 ITEM NO.: I z-6106 amendments in this area were controversial and staff believes any further amendment must be carefully reviewed. Therefore, Staff recommends a deferral so that the plan can be reviewed and discussed with the surrounding neighborhood groups and large property owners. STAFF ANALYSTS The request before the Commission is to rezone this property comprised of three tracts totaling 8.05± acres from "R-2" Single Family to 110-3" General Office. One single family home is located on each of the three tracts. Most of the property is undeveloped with the exception of the area directly adjacent to each of the homes. No specific development has been proposed for the property once it is zoned O-3. The property is part of a small single family residential pocket sandwiched between the Office and Institutional development along Woodland Heights and Rodney Parham Roads and the pending commercial development along Cantrell Road. The Easter Seals Complex and Christ the King Church and campus are located to the south. A new facility for St. Vincent's Medical Center is being constructed to the east. A proposed commercial shopping center has been approved for the property north of the site. A multibuilding office complex and a church are located adjacent to the west. Staff recognizes that, long-term, the residential properties in this pocket will in all likelihood convert to non- residential. However, there are still some 15-16 single family residences along Woodland Heights and Summit Roads. The River Mountain District Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use for these properties. Rezoning this 8.05± acres to 0-3 would at this time be in conflict with the Plan and would dramatically affect the remaining residential properties. Staff believes it is appropriate to defer this request so that the area zoning and land use plan can be further reviewed and discussed with the surrounding neighborhood groups and property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that this item be deferred to allow for further review of the area zoning and land use plan and discussion with the surrounding neighborhood groups and property owners. 2 June 6, 15 9.6 ,_ , ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 28, 1996) Tom Cole and Patrick McGetrick were present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had agreed to staff's recommendation to defer the item. The agreement was not reached until March 26, 1996; two days prior to the public hearing. A motion was made to waive the bylaws since the deferral request was not received at least 5 days prior to the public hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 9, 1996 commission meeting. The vote was 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. STAFF UPDATE: On April 11, 1996, the Planning Commission voted to amend the River Mountain District Land Use Plan to show Suburban Office for this 8.05± acres as well as the remaining residential properties north of Woodland Heights Road and along Summit Road. The Plan Amendment was forwarded to the Board of Directors and placed on their May 7, 1996 agenda. An update on the Board's action will be provided by staff. Staff supported the Plan Amendment and, based on the amendment, recommends approval of the requested 0-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 9, 1996) Tom Cole and David Jones were present representing the application. There were numerous objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the Board of Directors had approved the Land Use Plan Amendment on May 7, 1996 which changed this area to Suburban Office. Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, addressed the Commission. He informed the Commission that staff was not recommending approval of 0-3, as requested. He discussed the recent rezoning of property at Fairview and Woodland Heights Road to 0-3 which included conditions on building height and area coverage limits. Mr. Lawson stated that it was reasonable for this applicant to place similar restrictions on this 0-3 request. He stated that staff did not have in mind specific restrictions. Mr. Lawson stated that such considerations were consistent with the Suburban Office Land Use Plan designation. 3 June 6, 1996 , ,' , ) ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. Commissioner Daniel spoke against the 0-3 zoning request. He stated that he would prefer to see either an 0-1 or P.O.D. request. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, informed the Commission that the applicant was requesting that the item be deferred. David Jones reminded the Commission that the original deferral was requested by the Planning Staff and agreed to by the applicant to allow the Land Use Plan issue to be resolved. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant had worked with persons at Christ the King Catholic Church and had asked the Church to prepare a list of restrictions to be considered for attachment to the zoning application. He stated that the proposed list was faxed to the applicant at 3:28 p.m. on May 8, 1996 and that the applicant had not had time to respond. Commissioner Lichty asked how the proposed restrictions could affect the 0-3 zoning request. Mr. Jones responded that the list included such provisions as bulk and area as well as use limitations. He then discussed the nuances of 0-2 vs. 0-3 zoning. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant was willing to discuss the issues with the Church. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Jones if he would provide a copy of the restrictions to the Commission, if the requested deferral was granted. Mr. Jones responded that he would. Commissioner Putnam asked if the Commission could defer the item in light of the number of objectors present. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles stated that it was his opinion that the applicant had presented proper justification to support a deferral. A motion was made to defer the item. Mr. Lawson stated that the Commission should let those persons present address the issue of the deferral. Commissioner Hawn stated that he had received 500 communications in opposition to the rezoning and he was disappointed that the Commission did not receive a copy of the list of restrictions proposed by the church. Richard Stephens addressed the Commission as a representative of Christ the King Church. He stated that he did not provide a copy of the list to the Commissioners because he did not know if it was appropriate. He asked the Commission to act on the 0-3 rezoning request and not to grant the deferral. Commissioner Putnam voiced his support for the deferral request. 4 June 6, 19 9 6 -' ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Cont. Chairman Woods stated that he would like to see the applicant and the community work out their differences. Mr. Stephens reiterated his opposition to the deferral. A vote was taken on the motion to defer. The vote was 9 ayes, 1 noe and 1 absent. The item was deferred to the June 6, 1996 Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 6, 1996) Tom Cole, David Henry and David Jones were present representing the application. There were several objectors present. Staff presented the item. David Jones addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant felt that opposition to the proposed rezoning was primarily from Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that it appeared to be a conflict of interest to have any member of the church who sits on the Planning Commission or Board of Directors vote on the matter. Mr. Jones stated that the church's opposition to the rezoning was based on a disagreement between the church and the applicant on the purchase price of the property. He stated that the church had offered $1,200,000 for the property and the applicant was asking $1,650,000. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles informed the Commission that he had met with Commissioner Suzanne McCarthy, who is a member of Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that he felt there was no conflict of interest which would prohibit Commissioner McCarthy from voting on the issue. Mr. Giles stated that there are two questions to be asked when determining if a conflict of interest exists. The first being, is there an interest as defined by the Code of Ethics and the second being, is that interest in conflict with the individual's duties as a commissioner. Mr. Giles stated that the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese makes decisions regarding the purchase of property and that any one parish member did not affect that decision. Mr. Jones stated that he believed the church's opposition to the requested zoning was based on minor issues. He stated that the applicant had met with the opposition and reviewed the list of restrictions offered prior to the May 9, 1996 Commission meeting. He then presented a letter amending the application by including the following restrictions that are to be attached to the property when zoned: 5 June 6, 19'96, . }- ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) 1. A height limitation of 45 feet for any structure constructed on the subject property. 2. The following uses will be deleted as allowable uses: a. Permitted uses: College dormitory College fraternity or sorority Establishment for care of alcoholic or narcotic patients School (public or denominational) Church b. Accessory uses: Bar, lounge or tavern Beverage shop C. Conditional uses: Ambulance service post Cemetery or mausoleum High rise multi -family, at a density not greater than thirty (30) units per gross acre Hotel or motel Abortion clinic or adult bookstore All other requirements, as set forth in the Little Rock ordinances shall apply. Chairman Woods asked what the difference was between the restrictions requested by the church and the applicant's response. Mr. Jones responded that the church had requested a height limitation of 25 feet and the applicant had offered a limitation of 45 feet. He stated that the church had also requested extensive landscaping, beyond the Ordinance requirements, a 25 percent building/area ratio and parking to be provided at the rate of 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. Commissioner Lichty asked why the applicant had included churches and schools in the list of uses to be deleted from the property. Mr. Jones responded that traffic was a concern. He stated that the applicant had looked at Christ the King's property and observed that the church and church school generated the most traffic in the area. Mr. Jones gave a brief history of the rezoning application. He stated that there was a long-standing disagreement 6 June 6, 199.6 ' ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) between the church and the applicant. Mr. Jones stated that the church's growth and level of activities made the nearby residential properties unlivable. He noted that the church had never opposed any other office rezoning in the area and cited the nearby Easter Seals and St. Vincent properties as examples. Mr. Jones stated that for the Commission to deny this application, even with the proposed conditions, would be arbitrary and capricious. Failure to approve the rezoning, he stated, would affect the value of the property. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Mr. Jones stated that the applicant had acquired his property in 1973. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Jones why, in his opinion, the church was opposing the rezoning. Mr. Jones responded that each parishioner had his own motive and that some might feel that rezoning this site could affect the welfare of the children attending the church's school. Commissioner Putnam noted that there were no streets going through the church property and questioned how traffic related to the subject site could affect the children's safety. At Commissioner Hawn's request, Mr. Jones displayed a plan of the church property and pointed out the school, soccer field and gymnasium. Mr. Jones noted that the church building itself exceeded the height limitation proposed by the church for the applicant's property. He stated that the rezoning request was in conformance with the Land Use Plan and that the applicant had made concessions to the church's concerns. Commissioner Brandon questioned the $220,000 an acre cost for the property and wondered whether the site was desirable for development of a 45 foot tall office building. Mr. Jones responded that it was hard to determine a property's value when persons are giving up homes that have been occupied, in some cases, 20 years. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, Mr. Jones stated that traffic flow to the proposed office site would be determined by how the site was developed. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, City Traffic Engineer Bill Henry stated that there had been no traffic counts done on the abutting streets. Mr. Henry noted that the streets would be improved to Master Street Plan standards for commercial streets as the property is developed. r June 6, 19 9,6 ' ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, discussed the recent amendment to the Land Use Plan for this site. He stated that the Plan was amended to Suburban Office which envisions low -scale, internal development, not development such as that at the corner of Rodney Parham and Cantrell Road which is shown as Office on the Plan. Mr. Lawson stated that he would prefer to see the site developed in a manner similar to an adjacent 0-3 zoned property. This adjacent property was zoned 0-3 with restrictions on building height and area coverage. Mr. Lawson stated that staff could not support the application with a height restriction of 45 feet. Mr. Jones responded that the 45 foot height limit proposed by the applicant was not out of character with the neighborhood. He stated again that the 0-3 request was in conformance with the Land Use Plan. Commissioner Daniel asked if the zoning was approved with a height limit of 24 feet and the church bought the property, would the height restriction still apply. Mr. Giles responded that the height restriction would be a condition that would run with the land, regardless of who owned it. Commissioner Adcock asked if all the other buildings in the area exceeded a certain height, why impose a more stringent restriction on this applicant. Chairman Woods also voiced that some concern. Mr. Jones stated that building height was not an issue when the Easter Seals and St. Vincent properties were zoned 0-3. In every other application, he stated, there had been no effort by the church to impose conditions. Richard Stephens addressed the Commission on behalf of Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that the church had made attempts to acquire the applicant's property and had tried to make sure that the purchase of the property and this rezoning request were separate issues. Mr. Stephens stated that the church did not oppose the Land Use Plan amendment to Suburban Office but would like to see low- density, garden type Suburban Offices. He stated that the church did not oppose the rezoning of other properties in the area because those were different areas and issues which did not impact the church as this issue did. Mr. Stephens presented a drawing showing the building area ratio of several 0-2 and 0-3 zoned properties in the area. He noted that most had a building/area ratio of 25 percent and that the Block property to the south had a ratio of 49 8 June 6, 19 _1�6 ' ' ° ` ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Cont. percent. Mr. Stephens concluded by stating that the church would prefer to see the applicant amend the application to O-1. Commissioner Putnam asked why the church wanted a height restriction. Bill Canino, representing the church, stated that reduced building height and area coverage would result in reduced density of people on the site. He stated that the issue was primarily a question of safety for children on the church property. Mr. Canino presented drawings showing how the subject property could be developed with 75,000 square feet of building area in two-story buildings. Commissioner Putnam again questioned the restrictions that the church wanted imposed on the property. Mr. Lawson stated that when the Land Use Plan was amended to Suburban Office, it was recognized that the area would not be developed in one fell swoop. He stated that there is a need to protect the remaining residences and that building height is an issue that would have an effect on those remaining residences. In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mr. Lawson stated that there were 10-12 residences remaining in the area and that most were for sale. Chairman Woods asked if staff's opinion would be different if there were no homes in the area. Mr. Lawson stated that it would be different if the entire area were submitted for development at one time. Commissioner Hawn stated that it appeared staff was proposing that the zoning be done in a piecemeal fashion, resulting in this type of predicament every time a house is sold. Mr. Lawson responded that such was the case until no residential uses remain. Mr. Jones noted that residents of the area were ready to sell and move out. He stated that Mr. Lawson had previously stated that 0-2 and 0-3 were appropriate under the Suburban Office Land Use designation. Dan DeClerk, of 11516 Rocky Valley Drive, addressed the Commission in opposition to the rezoning. He stated that any increase in traffic would be detrimental. He discussed traffic problems in the area. Jim Badami stated that it was vindictive of the applicant to eliminate church and school from the zoning request. Commissioner Lichty asked what level of density would be acceptable to the church. Mr. Badami and Mr. Canino 9 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. responded that a building/area ratio of 25 percent and a 24 foot building height limitation would be acceptable. Chairman Woods asked how children are off-loaded at the church school. Mr. Canino responded that there are on-site driveways for dropping off and picking up the children. He noted that there were 750 children attending the school. Commissioner Hawn stated that he could not see how zoning this property would hurt the children. Mr. Canino responded that increased traffic would increase the chances of an accident. Chairman Woods stated that the additional square footage allowed by increasing the building height from 24 feet to 45 feet was not going to have the impact that the church thought it would. Commissioner Putnam asked the number of persons involved in the church school. Mr. Canino responded that there were 750 children and approximately 50 workers. He stated that the church and school do create traffic problems and that they do not want to see the traffic problem increased by this 0-3 zoning request. A motion was made to approve the 0-3 zoning request, as amended to include the restrictions offered by the applicant in the letter dated June 6, 1996. The vote was 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent. 10 April 11, 1996 Planning Hearing ITEM NO.: 1 NAME: City Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain District LOCATION: Either side of Summit to Woodland Heights REOUEST: Single Family to Suburban Office SOURCE: Z-6106 STAFF REPORT: As part of the Staff Review for a rezoning item, the adopted Land Use Plan for the area was reviewed. The request is for Office zoning (0-3) and the Plan shows Single Family use. Currently, the area is Single Family, with over a dozen homes. However, three recent (less than a year) changes in the area have occurred. First, the City approved a conditional use permit and a rezoning to the southwest for a small church and office development. This development, now built, further isolated the homes from the neighborhoods to the southwest. The second change was the City approval of an expansion of the Commercial use area to the north along Cantrell Road. The third change is the recent construction of a medical office on vacant (office zoned) property to the east. These changes have left a small residential, Single Family, pocket principally along Summit. Since the Commercial property has not been developed, the full impacts of these actions cannot yet be seen. However, Staff believes that the area is one which should be carefully handled. With the surrounding nonresidential developments, it is hard not to allow this area to convert to nonresidential. At the same time, Summit continues to be a viable residential street. The request by several owners has now forced the City to fully consider this location. After review of the existing conditions, Staff determined a change was appropriate. Three options were considered Transition Zone (TZ), Mixed Use, and Suburban Office. Transition Zone would attempt to protect the existing homes while allowing for a change to Office. However, since Staff believes the net effect of a TZ classification is a conversion to Office, a Suburban Office classification appears more realistic. Due to the existing pattern (use and zoning), Staff believes it is appropriate to amend the plan to Suburban Office. April 11, 1996 Planning Hearing ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Approval of Suburban Office PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (APRIL 11,1996) Tony Bozynski, Planning Manager, reviewed the proposed land use plan amendment for the Commission. He indicated a neighborhood meeting had been held on March 18, 1996 and that the residents of the area had mixed feelings to the proposed change. The Commission discussed the residents options in selling their residential property. There was also discussion on the land use definitions of Office and Suburban Office, and the difference between the two definitions. David Jones, of Vogel Jones Realty, representative for the applicant requesting a rezoning in the area, displayed a zoning map for the Commission and briefed them on development in the area. He indicated his client requested approval of the change to the land use plan. Richard Stephens, representing Christ the King Catholic Church, spoke in favor of the change in the land use plan. He indicated that the church was concerned about the intensity of office uses that would be allowed, preferring the office buildings to be low density with only a few floors. Kurt Henle, a Summit Road resident, spoke in favor of the proposed land use change. There was no one present in opposition to the proposed land use plan amendment. By unanimous (10 ayes, 0 noes) vote the Commission voted to approve the item. 2 --Juhe 6 , - 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: David Henry Patrick McGetrick West side of Woodland Heights Road approximately 220 feet south of Summit Road Rezone from R-2 to 0-3 Future office development 8.05± acres SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single Family homes; zoned R-2 South - Christ the King Church and School; zoned R-2 and Easter Seal Offices; zoned 0-3 East - New St. Vincent Hospital project under construction; zoned 0-3 West - Church and single family homes; zoned R-2 and new multibuilding office development; zoned 0-3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS Woodland, Fairview and Summit require dedications of right- of-way to 30 feet from centerline for this commercial re- zoning according to City Ordinance. The corner of Woodland Heights Road needs a radius of 450 feet per the Master Street Plan unless a controlled intersection can be constructed. This street should be improved in concert with the Saint Vincent Site to provide for commercial access to Highway 10. The existing street is a substandard 18 foot chipseal road with poor sight distance. The streets are required to be 36 foot commercial streets with sidewalks on both frontages. The site will require a grading permit prior to clearing. Stormwater detention analysis will be required at time of construction. Location of drives will need review. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is in conflict with the Plan. The last Plan June 6, 1996 ITEM NO • I Z-6106 (Cont.) amendments in this area were controversial and staff believes any further amendment must be carefully reviewed. Therefore, Staff recommends a deferral so that the plan can be reviewed and discussed with the surrounding neighborhood groups and large property owners. STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this property comprised of three tracts totaling 8.05± acres from "R-2" Single Family to 110-3" General Office. One single family home is located on each of the three tracts. Most of the property is undeveloped with the exception of the area directly adjacent to each of the homes. No specific development has been proposed for the property once it is zoned O-3. The property is part of a small single family residential pocket sandwiched between the Office and Institutional development along Woodland Heights and Rodney Parham Roads and the pending commercial development along Cantrell Road. The Easter Seals Complex and Christ the King Church and campus are located to the south. A new facility for St. Vincent's Medical Center is being constructed to the east. A proposed commercial shopping center has been approved for the property north of the site. A multibuilding office complex and a church are located adjacent to the west. Staff recognizes that, long-term, the residential properties in this pocket will in all likelihood convert to non- residential. However, there are still some 15-16 single family residences along Woodland Heights and Summit Roads. The River Mountain District Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use for these properties. Rezoning this 8.05± acres to 0-3 would at this time be in conflict with the Plan and would dramatically affect the remaining residential properties. Staff believes it is appropriate to defer this request so that the area zoning and land use plan can be further reviewed and discussed with the surrounding neighborhood groups and property owners. TAFF RECOMMENDATIO Staff recommends that this item be deferred to allow for further review of the area zoning and land use plan and discussion with the surrounding neighborhood groups and property owners. 2 "June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 28, 1996) Tom Cole and Patrick McGetrick were present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had agreed to staff's recommendation to defer the item. The agreement was not reached until March 26, 1996; two days prior to the public hearing. A motion was made to waive the bylaws since the deferral request was not received at least 5 days prior to the public hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 9, 1996 commission meeting. The vote was 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. STAFF UPDATE: On April 11, 1996, the Planning Commission voted to amend the River Mountain District Land Use Plan to show Suburban Office for this 8.05± acres as well as the remaining residential properties north of Woodland Heights Road and along Summit Road. The Plan Amendment was forwarded to the Board of Directors and placed on their May 7, 1996 agenda. An update on the Board's action will be provided by staff. Staff supported the Plan Amendment and, based on the amendment, recommends approval of the requested 0-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 9, 1996) Tom Cole and David Jones were present representing the application. There were numerous objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the Board of Directors had approved the Land Use Plan Amendment on May 7, 1996 which changed this area to Suburban Office. Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, addressed the Commission. He informed the Commission that staff was not recommending approval of 0-3, as requested. He discussed the recent rezoning of property at Fairview and Woodland Heights Road to 0-3 which included conditions on building height and area coverage limits. Mr. Lawson stated that it was reasonable for this applicant to place similar restrictions on this 0-3 request. He stated that staff did not have in mind specific restrictions. Mr. Lawson stated that such considerations were consistent with the Suburban Office Land Use Plan designation. 3 'June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. Commissioner Daniel spoke against the 0-3 zoning request. He stated that he would prefer to see either an 0-1 or P.O.D. request. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, informed the Commission that the applicant was requesting that the item be deferred. David Jones reminded the Commission that the original deferral was requested by the Planning Staff and agreed to by the applicant to allow the Land Use Plan issue to be resolved. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant had worked with persons at Christ the King Catholic Church and had asked the Church to prepare a list of restrictions to be considered for attachment to the zoning application. He stated that the proposed list was faxed to the applicant at 3:28 p.m. on May 8, 1996 and that the applicant had not had time to respond. Commissioner Lichty asked how the proposed restrictions could affect the 0-3 zoning request. Mr. Jones responded that the list included such provisions as bulk and area as well as use limitations. He then discussed the nuances of 0-2 vs. 0-3 zoning. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant was willing to discuss the issues with the Church. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Jones if he would provide a copy of the restrictions to the Commission, if the requested deferral was granted. Mr. Jones responded that he would. Commissioner Putnam asked if the Commission could defer the item in light of the number of objectors present. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles stated that it was his opinion that the applicant had presented proper justification to support a deferral. A motion was made to defer the item. Mr. Lawson stated that the Commission should let those persons present address the issue of the deferral. Commissioner Hawn stated that he had received 500 communications in opposition to the rezoning and he was disappointed that the Commission did not receive a copy of the list of restrictions proposed by the church. Richard Stephens addressed the Commission as a representative of Christ the King Church. He stated that he did not provide a copy of the list to the Commissioners because he did not know if it was appropriate. He asked the Commission to act on the 0-3 rezoning request and not to grant the deferral. Commissioner Putnam voiced his support for the deferral request. 4 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. Chairman Woods stated that he would like to see the applicant and the community work out their differences. Mr. Stephens reiterated his opposition to the deferral. A vote was taken on the motion to defer. The vote was 9 ayes, 1 noe and 1 absent. The item was deferred to the June 6, 1996 Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 6, 1996) Tom Cole, David Henry and David Jones were present representing the application. There were several objectors present. Staff presented the item. David Jones addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant felt that opposition to the proposed rezoning was primarily from Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that it appeared to be a conflict of interest to have any member of the church who sits on the Planning Commission or Board of Directors vote on the matter. Mr. Jones stated that the church's opposition to the rezoning was based on a disagreement between the church and the applicant on the purchase price of the property. He stated that the church had offered $1,200,000 for the property and the applicant was asking $1,650,000. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles informed the Commission that he had met with Commissioner Suzanne McCarthy, who is a member of Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that he felt there was no conflict of interest which would prohibit Commissioner McCarthy from voting on the issue. Mr. Giles stated that there are two questions to be asked when determining if a conflict of interest exists. The first being, is there an interest as defined by the Code of Ethics and the second being, is that interest in conflict with the individual's duties as a commissioner. Mr. Giles stated that the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese makes decisions regarding the purchase of property and that any one parish member did not affect that decision. Mr. Jones stated that he believed the church's opposition to the requested zoning was based on minor issues. He stated that the applicant had met with the opposition and reviewed the list of restrictions offered prior to the May 9, 1996 Commission meeting. He then presented a letter amending the application by including the following restrictions that are to be attached to the property when zoned: 5 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) _ 1. A height limitation of 45 feet for any structure constructed on the subject property. 2. The following uses will be deleted as allowable uses: a. 10 c. Permitted uses: College dormitory College fraternity Establishment for patients School (public or Church Accessory uses: or sorority care of alcoholic or narcotic denominational) -Bar, lounge or tavern Beverage shop Conditional uses: Ambulance service post Cemetery or mausoleum High rise multi -family, at a density not greater than thirty (30) units per gross acre Hotel or motel Abortion clinic or adult bookstore All other requirements, as set forth in the Little Rock ordinances shall apply. Chairman Woods asked what the difference was between the restrictions requested by the church and the applicant's response. Mr. Jones responded that the church had requested a height limitation of 25 feet and the applicant had offered a_limitation of 45 feet. He stated that the church had also requested extensive landscaping, beyond the Ordinance requirements, a 25 percent building/area ratio and parking to be provided at the rate of 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. Commissioner Lichty asked why the applicant had included churches and schools in the list of uses to be deleted from the property. Mr. Jones responded that traffic was a concern. He stated that the applicant had looked at Christ the Ring's property and observed that the church and church school generated the most traffic in the area. Mr. Jones gave a brief history of the rezoning application. He stated that there was a long-standing disagreement 0 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. between the church and the applicant. Mr. Jones stated that the church's growth and level of activities made the nearby residential properties unlivable. He noted that the church had never opposed any other office rezoning in the area and cited the nearby Easter Seals and St. Vincent properties as examples. Mr. Jones stated that for the Commission to deny this application, even with the proposed conditions, would be arbitrary and capricious. Failure to approve the rezoning, he stated, would affect the value of the property. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Mr. Jones stated that the applicant had acquired his property in 1973. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Jones why, in his opinion, the church was opposing the rezoning. Mr. Jones responded that each parishioner had his own motive and that some might feel that rezoning this site could affect the welfare of the children attending the church's school. Commissioner Putnam noted that there were no streets going through the church property and questioned how traffic related to the subject site could affect the children's safety. At Commissioner Hawn's request, Mr. Jones displayed a plan of the church property and pointed out the school, soccer field and gymnasium. Mr. Jones noted that the church building itself exceeded the height limitation proposed by the church for the applicant's property. He stated that the rezoning request was in conformance with the Land Use Plan and that the applicant had made concessions to the church's concerns. Commissioner Brandon questioned the $220,000 an acre cost for the property and wondered whether the site was desirable for development of a 45 foot tall office building. Mr. Jones responded that it was hard to determine a property's value when persons are giving up homes that have been occupied, in some cases, 20 years. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, Mr. Jones stated that traffic flow to the proposed office site would be determined by how the site was developed. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, City Traffic Engineer Bill Henry stated that there had been no traffic counts done on the abutting streets. Mr. Henry noted that the streets would be improved to Master Street Plan standards for commercial streets as the property is developed. 7 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, discussed the recent amendment to the Land Use Plan for this site. He stated that the Plan was amended to Suburban Office which envisions low -scale, internal development, not development such as that at the corner of Rodney Parham and Cantrell Road which is shown as Office on the Plan. Mr. Lawson stated that he would prefer to see the site developed in a manner similar to an adjacent 0-3 zoned property. This adjacent property was zoned 0-3 with restrictions on building height and area coverage. Mr. Lawson stated that staff could not support the application with a height restriction of 45 feet. Mr. Jones responded that the 45 foot height limit proposed by the applicant was not out of character with the neighborhood. He stated again that the 0-3 request was in conformance with the Land Use Plan. Commissioner Daniel asked if the zoning was approved with a height limit of 24 feet and the church bought the property, would the height restriction still apply. Mr. Giles responded that the height restriction would be a condition that would run with the land, regardless of who owned it. Commissioner Adcock asked if all the other buildings in the area exceeded a certain height, why impose a more stringent restriction on this applicant. Chairman Woods also voiced that some concern. Mr. Jones stated that building height was not an issue when the Easter Seals and St. Vincent properties were zoned 0-3. In every other application, he stated, there had been no effort by the church to impose conditions. Richard Stephens addressed the Commission on behalf of Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that the church had made attempts to acquire the applicant's property and had tried to make sure that the purchase of the property and this rezoning request were separate issues. Mr. Stephens stated that the church did not oppose the Land Use Plan amendment to Suburban Office but would like to see low- density, garden type Suburban Offices. He stated that the church did not oppose the rezoning of other properties in the area because those were different areas and issues which did not impact the church as this issue did. Mr. Stephens presented a drawing showing the building area ratio of several 0-2 and 0-3 zoned properties in the area. He noted that most had a building/area ratio of 25 percent and that the Block property to the south had a ratio of 49 f June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 __{Cont. percent. Mr. Stephens concluded by stating that the church would prefer to see the applicant amend the application to O-1. Commissioner Putnam asked why the church wanted a height restriction. Bill Canino, representing the church, stated that reduced building height and area coverage would result in reduced density of people on the site. He stated that the issue was primarily a question of safety for children on the church property. Mr. Canino presented drawings showing how the subject property could be developed with 75,000 square feet of building area in two-story buildings. Commissioner Putnam again questioned the restrictions that the church wanted imposed on the property. Mr. Lawson stated that when the Land Use Plan was amended to Suburban Office, it was recognized that the area would not be developed in one fell swoop. He stated that there is a need to protect the remaining residences and that building height is an issue that would have an effect on those remaining residences. In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mr. Lawson stated that there were 10-12 residences remaining in the area and that most were for sale. Chairman Woods asked if staff's opinion would be different if there were no homes in the area. Mr. Lawson stated that it would be different if the entire area were submitted for development at one time. Commissioner Hawn stated that it appeared staff was proposing that the zoning be done in a piecemeal fashion, resulting in this type of predicament every time a house is sold. Mr. Lawson responded that such was the case until no residential uses remain. Mr. Jones noted that residents of the area were ready to sell and move out. He stated that Mr. Lawson had previously stated that 0-2 and 0-3 were appropriate under the Suburban Office Land Use designation. Dan DeClerk, of 11516 Rocky Valley Drive, addressed the Commission in opposition to the rezoning. He stated that any increase in traffic would be detrimental. He discussed traffic problems in the area. Jim Badami stated that it was vindictive of the applicant to eliminate church and school from the zoning request. Commissioner Lichty asked what level of density would be acceptable to the church. Mr. Badami and Mr. Canino 9 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I _Z-6106 (Cont_. responded that a building/area ratio of 25 percent and a 24 foot building height limitation would be acceptable. Chairman Woods asked how children are off-loaded at the church school. Mr. Canino responded that there are on-site driveways for dropping off and picking up the children. He noted that there were 750 children attending the school. Commissioner Hawn stated that he could not see how zoning this property would hurt the children. Mr. Canino responded that increased traffic would increase the chances of an accident. Chairman Woods stated that the additional square footage allowed by increasing the building height from 24 feet to 45 feet was not going to have the impact that the church thought it would. Commissioner Putnam asked the number of persons involved in the church school. Mr. Canino responded that there were 750 children and approximately 50 workers. He stated that the church and school do create traffic problems and that they do not want to see the traffic problem increased by this 0-3 zoning request. A motion was made to approve the 0-3 zoning request, as amended to include the restrictions offered by the applicant in the letter dated June 6, 1996. The vote was 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent. 10 -June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: David Henry Patrick McGetrick West side of Woodland Heights Road approximately 220 feet south of Summit Road Rezone from R-2 to 0-3 Future office development 8.05± acres SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Single Family homes; zoned R-2 South - Christ the King Church and School; zoned R-2 and Easter Seal Offices; zoned 0-3 East - New St. Vincent Hospital project under construction; zoned 0-3 West - Church and single family homes; zoned R-2 and new multibuilding office development; zoned 0-3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS Woodland, Fairview and Summit require dedications of right- of-way to 30 feet from centerline for this commercial re- zoning according to City Ordinance. The corner of Woodland Heights Road needs a radius of 450 feet per the Master Street Plan unless a controlled intersection can be constructed. This street should be improved in concert with the Saint Vincent Site to provide for commercial access to Highway 10. The existing street is a substandard 18 foot chipseal road with poor sight distance. The streets are required to be 36 foot commercial streets with sidewalks on both frontages. The site will require a grading permit prior to clearing. Stormwater detention analysis will be required at time of construction. Location of drives will need review. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is in conflict with the Plan. The last Plan June 6, 1996 'ITEM NO • I Z-6106 (Cont.) amendments in this area were controversial and staff believes any further amendment must be carefully reviewed. Therefore, Staff recommends a deferral so that the plan can be reviewed and discussed with the surrounding neighborhood groups and large property owners. TAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this property comprised of three tracts totaling 8.05± acres from "R-2" Single Family to 110-3" General Office. One single family home is located on each of the three tracts. Most of the property is undeveloped with the exception of the area directly adjacent to each of the homes. No specific development has been proposed for the property once it is zoned O-3. The property is part of a small single family residential pocket sandwiched between the Office and Institutional development along Woodland Heights and Rodney Parham Roads and the pending commercial development along Cantrell Road. The Easter Seals Complex and Christ the King Church and campus are located to the south. A new facility for St. Vincent's Medical Center is being constructed to the east. A proposed commercial shopping center has been approved for the property north of the site. A multibuilding office complex and a church are located adjacent to the west. Staff recognizes that, long-term, the residential properties in this pocket will in all likelihood convert to non- residential. However, there are still some 15-16 single family residences along Woodland Heights and Summit Roads. The River Mountain District Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use for these properties. Rezoning this 8.05± acres to 0-3 would at this time be in conflict with the Plan and would dramatically affect the remaining residential properties. Staff believes it is appropriate to defer this request so that the area zoning and land use plan can be further reviewed and discussed with the surrounding neighborhood groups and property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that this item be deferred to allow for further review of the area zoning and land use plan and discussion with the surrounding neighborhood groups and property owners. K, Jtine 6, 1996 'ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTI011J: (MARCH 28, 1996) Tom Cole and Patrick McGetrick were present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the applicant had agreed to staff's recommendation to defer the item. The agreement was not reached until March 26, 1996; two days prior to the public hearing. A motion was made to waive the bylaws since the deferral request was not received at least 5 days prior to the public hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 9, 1996 commission meeting. The vote was 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. STAFF UPDATE: On April 11, 1996, the Planning Commission voted to amend the River Mountain District Land Use Plan to show Suburban Office for this 8.05± acres as well as the remaining residential properties north of Woodland Heights Road and along Summit Road. The Plan Amendment was forwarded to the Board of Directors and placed on their May 7, 1996 agenda. An update on the Board's action will be provided by staff. Staff supported the Plan Amendment and, based on the amendment, recommends approval of the requested 0-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 9, 1996) Tom Cole and David Jones were present representing the application. There were numerous objectors present. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the Board of Directors had approved the Land Use Plan Amendment on May 7, 1996 which changed this area to Suburban Office. Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, addressed the Commission. He informed the Commission that staff was not recommending approval of 0-3, as requested. He discussed the recent rezoning of property at Fairview and Woodland Heights Road to 0-3 which included conditions on building height and area coverage limits. Mr. Lawson stated that it was reasonable for this applicant to place similar restrictions on this 0-3 request. He stated that staff did not have in mind specific restrictions. Mr. Lawson stated that such considerations were consistent with the Suburban Office Land Use Plan designation. 3 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. Commissioner Daniel spoke against the 0-3 zoning request. He stated that he would prefer to see either an 0-1 or P.O.D. request. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, informed the Commission that the applicant was requesting that the item be deferred. David Jones reminded the Commission that the original deferral was requested by the Planning Staff and agreed to by the applicant to allow the Land Use Plan issue to be resolved. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant had worked with persons at Christ the King Catholic Church and had asked the Church to prepare a list of restrictions to be considered for attachment to the zoning application. He stated that the proposed list was faxed to the applicant at 3:28 p.m. on May 8, 1996 and that the applicant had not had time to respond. Commissioner Lichty asked how the proposed restrictions could affect the 0-3 zoning request. Mr. Jones responded that the list included such provisions as bulk and area as well as use limitations. He then discussed the nuances of 0-2 vs. 0-3 zoning. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant was willing to discuss the issues with the Church. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Jones if he would provide a copy of the restrictions to the Commission, if the requested deferral was granted. Mr. Jones responded that he would. Commissioner Putnam asked if the Commission could defer the item in light of the number of objectors present. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles stated that it was his opinion that the applicant had presented proper justification to support a deferral. A motion was made to defer the item. Mr. Lawson stated that the Commission should let those persons present address the issue of the deferral. Commissioner Hawn stated that he had received 500 communications in opposition to the rezoning and he was disappointed that the Commission did not receive a copy of the list of restrictions proposed by the church. Richard Stephens addressed the Commission as a representative of Christ the King Church. He stated that he did not provide a copy of the list to the Commissioners because he did not know if it was appropriate. He asked the Commission to act on the 0-3 rezoning request and not to grant the deferral. Commissioner Putnam voiced his support for the deferral request. 4 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I 2-6106 (Cont.) Chairman Woods stated that he would like to see the applicant and the community work out their differences. Mr. Stephens reiterated his opposition to the deferral. A vote was taken on the motion to defer. The vote was 9 ayes, 1 noe and 1 absent. The item was deferred to the June 6, 1996 Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 6, 1996) Tom Cole, David Henry and David Jones were present representing the application. There were several objectors present. Staff presented the item. David Jones addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Jones stated that the applicant felt that opposition to the proposed rezoning was primarily from Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that it appeared to be a conflict of interest to have any member of the church who sits on the Planning Commission or Board of Directors vote on the matter. Mr. Jones stated that the church's opposition to the rezoning was based on a disagreement between the church and the applicant on the purchase price of the property. He stated that the church had offered $1,200,000 for the property and the applicant was asking $1,650,000. Deputy City Attorney Steve Giles informed the Commission that he had met with Commissioner Suzanne McCarthy, who is a member of Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that he felt there was no conflict of interest which would prohibit Commissioner McCarthy from voting on the issue. Mr. Giles stated that there are two questions to be asked when determining if a conflict of interest exists. The first being, is there an interest as defined by the Code of Ethics and the second being, is that interest in conflict with the individual's duties as a commissioner. Mr. Giles stated that the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese makes decisions regarding the purchase of property and that any one parish member did not affect that decision. Mr. Jones stated that he believed the church's opposition to the requested zoning was based on minor issues. He stated that the applicant had met with the opposition and reviewed the list of restrictions offered prior to the May 9, 1996 Commission meeting. He then presented a letter amending the application by including the following restrictions that are to be attached to the property when zoned: 5 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) 1. A height limitation of 45 feet for any structure constructed on the subject property. 2. The following uses will be deleted as allowable uses: a. Q c. Permitted uses: College dormitory College fraternity Establishment for patients School (public or Church Accessory uses: or sorority care of alcoholic or narcotic denominational) Bar, lounge or tavern Beverage shop Conditional uses: Ambulance service post Cemetery or mausoleum High rise multi -family, at a density not greater than thirty (30) units per gross acre Hotel or motel Abortion clinic or adult bookstore All other requirements, as set forth in the Little Rock ordinances shall apply. Chairman Woods asked what the difference was between the restrictions requested by the church and the applicant's response. Mr. Jones responded that the church had requested a height limitation of 25 feet and the applicant had offered a limitation of 45 feet. He stated that the church had also requested extensive landscaping, beyond the Ordinance requirements, a 25 percent building/area ratio and parking to be provided at the rate of 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. Commissioner Lichty asked why the applicant had included churches and schools in the list of uses to be deleted from the property. Mr. Jones responded that traffic was a concern. He stated that the applicant had looked at Christ the King's property and observed that the church and church school generated the most traffic in the area. Mr. Jones gave a brief history of the rezoning application. He stated that there was a long-standing disagreement 6 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont. between the church and the applicant. Mr. Jones stated that the church's growth and level of activities made the nearby residential properties unlivable. He noted that the church had never opposed any other office rezoning in the area and cited the nearby Easter Seals and St. Vincent properties as examples. Mr. Jones stated that for the Commission to deny this application, even with the proposed conditions, would be arbitrary and capricious. Failure to approve the rezoning, he stated, would affect the value of the property. In response to a question from Commissioner Putnam, Mr. Jones stated that the applicant had acquired his property in 1973. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Jones why, in his opinion, the church was opposing the rezoning. Mr. Jones responded that each parishioner had his own motive and that some might feel that rezoning this site could affect the welfare of the children attending the church's school. Commissioner Putnam noted that there were no streets going through the church property and questioned how traffic related to the subject site could affect the children's safety. At Commissioner Hawn's request, Mr. Jones displayed a plan of the church property and pointed out the school, soccer field and gymnasium. Mr. Jones noted that the church building itself exceeded the height limitation proposed by the church for the applicant's property. He stated that the rezoning request was in conformance with the Land Use Plan and that the applicant had made concessions to the church's concerns. Commissioner Brandon questioned the $220,000 an acre cost for the property and wondered whether the site was desirable for development of a 45 foot tall office building. Mr. Jones responded that it was hard to determine a property's value when persons are giving up homes that have been occupied, in some cases, 20 years. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, Mr. Jones stated that traffic flow to the proposed office site would be determined by how the site was developed. In response to a question from Commissioner Hawn, City Traffic Engineer Bill Henry stated that there had been no traffic counts done on the abutting streets. Mr. Henry noted that the streets would be improved to Master Street Plan standards for commercial streets as the property is developed. 7 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 Cont. Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, discussed the recent amendment to the Land Use Plan for this site. He stated that the Plan was amended to Suburban Office which envisions low -scale, internal development, not development such as that at the corner of Rodney Parham and Cantrell Road which is shown as Office on the Plan. Mr. Lawson stated that he would prefer to see the site developed in a manner similar to an adjacent 0-3 zoned property. This adjacent property was zoned 0-3 with restrictions on building height and area coverage. Mr. Lawson stated that staff could not support the application with a height restriction of 45 feet. Mr. Jones responded that the 45 foot height limit proposed by the applicant was not out of character with the neighborhood. He stated again that the 0-3 request was in conformance with the Land Use Plan. Commissioner Daniel asked if the zoning was approved with a height limit of 24 feet and the church bought the property, would the height restriction still apply. Mr. Giles responded that the height restriction would be a condition that would run with the land, regardless of who owned it. Commissioner Adcock asked if all the other buildings in the area exceeded a certain height, why impose a more stringent restriction on this applicant. Chairman Woods also voiced that some concern. Mr. Jones stated that building height was not an issue when the Easter Seals and St. Vincent properties were zoned 0-3. In every other application, he stated, there had been no effort by the church to impose conditions. Richard Stephens addressed the Commission on behalf of Christ the King Catholic Church. He stated that the church had made attempts to acquire the applicant's property and had tried to make sure that the purchase of the property and this rezoning request were separate issues. Mr. Stephens stated that the church did not oppose the Land Use Plan amendment to Suburban Office but would like to see low- density, garden type Suburban Offices. He stated that the church did not oppose the rezoning of other properties in the area because those were different areas and issues which did not impact the church as this issue did. Mr. Stephens presented a drawing showing the building area ratio of several 0-2 and 0-3 zoned properties in the area. He noted that most had a building/area ratio of 25 percent and that the Block property to the south had a ratio of 49 8 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I Z-6106 (Cont.) percent. Mr. Stephens concluded by stating that the church would prefer to see the applicant amend the application to O-1. Commissioner Putnam asked why the church wanted a height restriction. Bill Canino, representing the church, stated that reduced building height and area coverage would result in reduced density of people on the site. He stated that the issue was primarily a question of safety for children on the church property. Mr. Canino presented drawings showing how the subject property could be developed with 75,000 square feet of building area in two-story buildings. Commissioner Putnam again questioned the restrictions that the church wanted imposed on the property. Mr. Lawson stated that when the Land Use Plan was amended to Suburban Office, it was recognized that the area would not be developed in one fell swoop. He stated that there is a need to protect the remaining residences and that building height is an issue that would have an effect on those remaining residences. In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mr. Lawson stated that there were 10-12 residences remaining in the area and that most were for sale. Chairman Woods asked if staff's opinion would be different if there were no homes in the area. Mr. Lawson stated that it would be different if the entire area were submitted for development at one time. Commissioner Hawn stated that it appeared staff was proposing that the zoning be done in a piecemeal fashion, resulting in this type of predicament every time a house is sold. Mr. Lawson responded that such was the case until no residential uses remain. Mr. Jones noted that residents of the area were ready to sell and move out. He stated that Mr. Lawson had previously stated that 0-2 and 0-3 were appropriate under the Suburban Office Land Use designation. Dan DeClerk, of 11516 Rocky Valley Drive, addressed the Commission in opposition to the rezoning. He stated that any increase in traffic would be detrimental. He discussed traffic problems in the area. Jim Badami stated that it was vindictive of the applicant to eliminate church and school from the zoning request. Commissioner Lichty asked what level of density would be acceptable to the church. Mr. Badami and Mr. Canino 9 June 6, 1996 ITEM NO.: I_ Z-6106 (Cont. responded that a building/area ratio of 25 percent and a 24 foot building height limitation would be acceptable. Chairman Woods asked how children are off-loaded at the church school. Mr. Canino responded that there are on-site driveways for dropping off and picking up the children. He noted that there were 750 children attending the school. Commissioner Hawn stated that he could not see how zoning this property would hurt the children. Mr. Canino responded that increased traffic would increase the chances of an accident. Chairman Woods stated that the additional square footage allowed by increasing the building height from 24 feet to 45 feet was not going to have the impact that the church thought it would. Commissioner Putnam asked the number of persons involved in the church school. Mr. Canino responded that there were 750 children and approximately 50 workers. He stated that the church and school do create traffic problems and that they do not want to see the traffic problem increased by this 0-3 zoning request. A motion was made to approve the 0-3 zoning request, as amended to include the restrictions offered by the applicant in the letter dated June 6, 1996. The vote was 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent. 10