Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6763-A Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z NAME: Union Rescue Mission Short -form POD LOCATION: Adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad; North of West 11th Street and West of Thayer Street DEVELOPER: Union Rescue Mission 3001 Confederate Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72206 ENGINEER: Lewis, Elliott and Studer 11225 Huron Lane, Suite 104 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 2.43 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: 1-2 ALLOWED USES: Light Industrial PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: Union Rescue Mission facilities VARIAN CESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of a proposed rezoning request for the Union Rescue Mission from 1-2 to POD on November 11, 1999. The Board of Directors at their January 20, 2001 meeting denied the request. The applicant proposed to rezone the 2.43 -acre site from 1-2 to POD to allow for the development of the Union Rescue Mission facility. The project was to house administrative offices, temporary living quarters, food preparation and dining areas, and educational space. A Future Land Use Plan amendment was also filed and later denied by the Board of Directors. FILE NO.: Z -6763-A The applicant proposed to construct a 29,000 square foot, single story building along the south side of West 10th Street, west of Thayer Street. The applicant also proposed to construct a small area of parking (21 spaces) along the north side of West 10th Street and a small area of parking (19 spaces) along the north side of West 11th Street. The proposed building was to be one story with a 30 -foot ridge height. The fagade was to be a split face block and brick, with a colored raised seam metal roof. One wall - mounted sign was proposed which would have an area of approximately 25 square feet. The applicant proposed to abandon the portion of West 10th Street between the railroad right-of-way and Thayer Street, the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision (block bounded by Thayer Street, West 10th Street, West 11th Street, and the railroad right-of-way), and the portion of West 11th Street between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way. The applicant noted the facility would include the following uses: 1. Temporary living quarters — 180 to 200 beds 2. Office space — 5,800 square feet 3. Educational space — 4,000 square feet 4. Kitchen and dining areas A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant has filed exactly the same application as was previously approved by the Planning Commission and denied by the Board of Directors. The applicant proposes to construct a 29,000 square foot, single story building along the south side of West 10th Street and west of Thayer Street. The applicant also proposes to construct a small area of parking (21 spaces) along the north side of West 10th Street and a small area of parking (19 spaces) along the north side of West 11th Street. The proposed building is to be one story with a 30 -foot ridge height. The fagade will be a split face block and brick, with a colored raised seam metal roof. One wall -mounted sign is proposed which will have an area of approximately 25 square feet and signage is proposed on the "bell -tower". The applicant proposes to abandon a portion of West 10th Street between the railroad right-of-way and Thayer Street, the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision (block bounded by Thayer Street, West 10th Street, West 11th Street, and the railroad right-of-way), and the portion of West 11th Street between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way. 2 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A The applicant notes the facility will include the following uses: • Temporary living quarters — 180 to 200 beds • Office space — 5,800 square feet • Educational space — 4,000 square feet • Kitchen and dining areas A Future Land Use Plan amendment has also been filed in association with the proposed development (Item # 15 File No. LU02-08-03). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The portion of the site along the north side of West 10th Street is vacant, grass - covered and fenced. There are no trees on this portion of the site. The area on the south side of West 10th Street is also vacant and grass -covered, with a scattering of trees. This portion of the site is where single family homes once existed, and is 9 to 8 feet above the existing grade of West 20th Street. There is railroad right-of-way along the west boundary of the site, with industrial buildings and single-family residences further west. There are two industrial buildings and a monopole tower to the north, between this site and 1-630. There is an auto salvage yard to the northeast at the southeast corner of Maryland and Thayer Streets. There are four (4) single-family residences immediately east of the proposed building, within .the same block, with additional single family residences further south across West 11th Street and east across Thayer Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received several phone calls from persons requesting information on this application. The Capital Hill, the Central High, the Capitol View, the Downtown, the Pine to Woodrow and the Stephen Neighborhood Associations were notified of the Public Hearing as well as residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and all property owners within 200 feet of the site. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the corner of West 10th and Thayer Streets. 2. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development. Applicant may petition to abandon West 10th Street. Improvements are required on West 11th Street and on Thayer Street where they abut the property. 3. Submit petition to close alley. 3 FILE NO.: Z-67 E. F 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-340-4854 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 6. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 8. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 9. A Grading Permit will be required per Sec. 29-186 (c) & (d). UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. ENTERGY: Approved as submitted. ARKLA: Approved as submitted. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water: A 3/" is the maximum meter size available off existing water mains. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine if additional public and/or private fire hydrant (s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional details at 918-3752. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is located on Bus Route #3 and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Light Industrial, Industrial, Park / Open Space and Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development to provide temporary lodging, offices, and social services. A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (LU02-08-03). City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Stephens Area Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing goal recommends the removal of substandard houses and lots, with an objective 4 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A of providing a safer living environment. Actions statements support the removal of burnt and unsafe buildings while cleaning vacant weed lots and alleys. Landscape: A total of six (6) percent of the interior of the vehicular use area must be landscaped with interior islands. This takes into account the reduction allowed within the designated "mature area". Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Building Codes: No comment received. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: May 30, 2002 The applicant was present representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed request noting the proposal was exactly the same as the proposal reviewed by the Commission at their November 1999 Public Hearing. Staff stated there were additions needed on the site plan, (building heights, dumpster location, building dimensions, building setbacks). Staff also stated they would need the days and hours of operation, the number of employees and the details of any fencing. Public Works comments were addressed. The applicant was told to either make street improvements to West 10th Street or petition the City for closure. Staff stated a 20 -foot radial dedication would be required at the corner of West 11th Street and Thayer Street, but the intersection would not be reconstructed at this time. Mr. Lawson stated the applicant„ should try to meet with the neighborhoods prior to the Commission meeting. He stated his staff would contact all the persons involved in the original application, both for and against, and invite them to a community meeting. After the discussion, the Committee then forwarded the proposed rezoning to Planned Office Development, to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS; The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has noted that the Public Works comments will be complied with. The applicant proposes a six (6) foot high wood -screening fence adjacent to the residential uses. The applicant is also proposing a 7.5 -foot buffer along the east property line (east of proposed building and east of parking area accessed from West 11 th Street). As noted in the Background Section and in Paragraph A of this report, the applicant is requesting abandonment of three (3) pieces of right-of-way as part of 5 NO.: Z -6763-A the development plan. By endorsing the proposed site development plan, the Commission can recommend approval of the abandonment requests. The applicant will need to file additional paperwork with Public Works and the City Clerk prior to the application being forwarded to the Board of Directors. Otherwise, to staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this application. Staff feels that"the proposed development will have no adverse effect on the general area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed POD zoning subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. 2. Staff recommends approval of the following abandonment's: a. West 10th Street, between Thayer Street and the railroad right-of-way b. West 11th Street, between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way c. Alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 20, 2002) Mr. William Willis was present representing the application. There were several objectors present. There were eight (8) Commissioners present. The Chairman stated it was Planning Commission policy to offer a deferral to the applicant when fewer than nine (9) Commissioners were present. The applicant requested a deferral to the August 8, 2002 Public Hearing. The Commission voted to defer the application by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent and 1 vacant position. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter requesting this item be deferred to the September 19, 2002 Planning Commission Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 8, 2002) The applicant was not present representing the application. There were objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request to defer the item to the September 19, 2002 Public Hearing. Chairman Lowry asked if the persons in opposition were opposed to the item being deferred. They stated they were not in opposition of the deferral. n NO.: Z-6763 There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 19, 2002) Mr. William Willis was present representing the application. There were numerous objectors present. The Land Use Plan amendment Item #C and the rezoning request were discussed simultaneously. Staff presented each item and made a recommendation of approval for each. Mr. William Willis, General Manager of the Union Rescue Mission, was present representing the application. He stated due to the Riverfront development the homeless population had begun to move to the west. He stated the Union Rescue Mission had made the request to locate at this site previously and was requesting endorsement once again. He stated the Union Rescue had searched to find an alternative location but had been unsuccessful. He stated the Union Rescue had looked at nine (9) alternative locations, none of which were suitable for various reasons. He stated the Commission had been given the crime rate for the areas in which the Union Rescue Mission operated and the area, which the Union Rescue Mission wished to locate. He stated the data indicated the crime rate was lower in areas where the Mission was currently operating. He stated the 1990 estimates of homelessness were 280 homeless and in 2000 the number was closer to 1000. He stated the Mission felt the number was more near 2000. He stated additional beds would be needed since the Salvation Army was closing its facility and the City of North Little Rock had bought the land of the current Mission site. He stated there were numerous businesses, homes and churches that support the Mission and their efforts. He stated the Union Rescue was trying to fill a need with a new facility. He stated the Mission was trying to fill a need, which was growing in the direction of the central city already. Mr. Henry Barton, President of the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition of the development. He stated the size of the facility was too big for the neighborhood. He stated the fear of the residents were those who would be released into the neighborhood with out supervision. He stated there were 400+ signatures in opposition of the development. He stated to many unpredictable people visited the Mission. He stated people who had been turned away because of drugs and alcohol would have no place to go but into the neighborhoods. He stated the site selected was not the site to place a Mission of this size. 7 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A Ms. Ethel Ambrose, President of the Central High Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated it was not good practice to place a Mission of this size in a fragile neighborhood. She stated there were currently 20 million plus in restoration dollars being spent in the neighborhood. She stated businesses in the area have expressed concerns with security. Ms. Ambrose stated, the area currently houses 20+ treatment facilities. She stated if there was nothing wrong with a Mission then why did other residents not want the Mission in their neighborhood. Mr. Larry Rogers spoke in opposition to the proposed development. He stated he would like to call City staff on their endorsement of the proposal. He stated staff had stated homelessness would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. He stated he would disagree and so would the businesses downtown. Mr. Rogers stated the Westside Jr. High School had recently been purchased and was being renovated. He stated the Arkansas Children's Hospital was investing millions in the neighborhood. He commented on various other projects currently under design or construction within the neighborhood. He requested the Commission not put the neighborhood back by approving the facility. Ms. Susan Leslie, Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association President, spoke in opposition of the proposed application. She stated the Union Rescue never called to discuss the proposed project prior to receiving notification from the city. She stated the group had document how the residents felt through the 400+ signatures on the petitions. She stated 70% of the beds would be transient beds and the holders would be put into the neighborhoods daily. She stated the Mission in North Little Rock currently had 30 beds. She stated this was a much easier number to control than 200 beds. She stated the proposed development was in conflict with the neighborhoods action plan. She stated the eastern area of the neighborhood was proposed as a park area with walking trails that were proposed to connect to the Millennium Trail. She stated the Salvation Army site was located on the railroad and faced away from residential neighborhoods. She stated the Thrift Store was the same distance from the Salvation Army site as was the Thayer Street location. Ms. Nettie Lawson spoke in opposition of the application. She stated she and her husband had lived in the area for 38 years. She stated she and her husband had retired and this was their retirement. She stated in the neighborhood everyone knew each other and felt safe. She stated a neighborhood was not the place for a Mission. She stated the Mission would serve 2000 people, which was to many people to bring into a neighborhood. PD Legoyet spoke in opposition of the proposal. He stated he had recently graduated from college and was returning home. He stated he had plans to buy a home in the area, as did some of his friends. He stated the area had significantly improved. He stated there was a time when the area was riddled with gang activity and a high crime rate. He stated the placement of the Mission would not help property values in the area. FILE NO.: Z -6763-A Mr. Willis stated he would like to clear up a few comments. He stated Mayor Hayes of North Little Rock was very supportive of the mission. He stated there were more than 25 beds in North Little Rock. He stated there was a great need for the Mission and regardless of the location someone would oppose the location. Commissioner Rahman questioned Mr. Willis on how clients found the mission. Mr. Willis stated from various agencies such as the VA and from the network of homeless persons giving the location. Phil Hill, Director of the Men's program for the Mission, stated there were 30 to 40 people at the Mission on any given night. He stated the Mission had had as many as 200 people in one night but it was an extremely cold night. He stated if a client was suspect then drug and alcohol testing was performed. He stated if a person tested positive then their privileges were taken away leaving them no reason to be in the neighborhood. Commissioner Allen asked if there was a screening process. Mr. Hill stated there was not a background check performed. He stated the person was required to have an id and be drug and alcohol free. Commissioner Berry stated he had attended the three (3) neighborhood meetings conducted and nothing had changed. He asked why the Mission wanted to pursue this location. Mr. Hill stated the other locations were not suitable for various reasons, size, location, and cost. He stated it was important to have a location that did have access not through the neighborhood. Commissioner Berry stated the land was zoned 1-2 and listed uses which could locate on the site without a hearing. He asked Ms. Ambrose how the neighborhood felt about the possibility of these uses locating on the site. Ms. Ambrose stated the three neighborhoods were in the process of developing a Design Overlay District for the area and they were willing to take a chance. Commissioner Faust questioned how small would the mission have to be to be acceptable. Mr. Barton stated it was the use and the population that would be attracted by the Mission was the neighborhood's concern. Commissioner Nunnley stated the mission was a viable part of the city but not in a residential neighborhood. He stated there was a vagrancy problem on 12th and Woodrow Streets. He stated a residential neighborhood was not the place for a Mission and adding the Mission to this neighborhood was not a good alternative. Commissioner Faust asked if neighborhoods were opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment. Ms. Ambrose stated they were not opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment. Susan Leslie stated Capitol View did not take a stand on the Land Use Plan. D FILE NO.: Z -6763-A After a discussion as to if the two items were tied together and it was determined they were not a motion was made to approve the Land Use Plan amendment. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 recuse. A motion was made to approve the rezoning of the site as requested by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes, 8 noes, 0 absent and 1 recuse. Commission Rector stated he had left the room during the discussion due to a possible conflict of interest. He stated he did have an economic interest in the area with a piece of property he recently acquired. 10 September 19, 2002 ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A NAME: Union Rescue Mission Short -form POD LOCATION: Adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad; North of West 11th Street and West of Thayer Street DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Union Rescue Mission Lewis, Elliott and Studer 3001 Confederate Blvd. 11225 Huron Lane, Suite 104 Little Rock, AR 72206 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 2.43 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: 1-2 ALLOWED USES: Light Industrial ROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: Union Rescue Mission facilities VARIAN C ESNVAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of a proposed rezoning request for the Union Rescue Mission from 1-2 to POD on November 11, 1999. The Board of Directors at their January 20, 2001 meeting denied the request. The applicant proposed to rezone the 2.43 -acre site from 1-2 to POD to allow for the development of the Union Rescue Mission facility. The project was to house administrative offices, temporary living quarters, food preparation and dining areas, and educational space. A Future Land Use Plan amendment was also filed and later denied by the Board of Directors. September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z -6753-A The applicant proposed to construct a 29,000 square foot, single story building along the south side of West 10th Street, west of Thayer Street. The applicant also proposed to construct a small area of parking (21 spaces) along the north side of West 10th Street and a small area of parking (19 spaces) along the north side of West 11th Street. The proposed building was to be one story with a 30 -foot ridge height. The fagade was to be a split face block and brick, with a colored raised seam metal roof. One wall - mounted sign was proposed which would have an area of approximately 25 square feet. The applicant proposed to abandon the portion of West 10th Street between the railroad right-of-way and Thayer Street, the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision (block bounded by Thayer Street, West 10th Street, West 11th Street, and the railroad right-of-way), and the portion of West 11th Street between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way. The applicant noted the facility would include the following uses: 1. Temporary living quarters — 180 to 200 beds 2. Office space — 5,800 square feet 3. Educational space — 4,000 square feet 4. Kitchen and dining areas A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant has filed exactly the same application as was previously approved by the Planning Commission and denied by the Board of Directors. The applicant proposes to construct a 29,000 square foot, single story building along the south side of West 10th Street and west of Thayer Street. The applicant also proposes to construct a small area of parking (21 spaces) along the north side of West 10th Street and a small area of parking (19 spaces) along the north side of West 11th Street. The proposed building is to be one story with a 30 -foot ridge height. The fagade will be a split face block and brick, with a colored raised seam metal roof. One wall -mounted sign is proposed which will have an area of approximately 25 square feet and signage is proposed on the "bell -tower". The applicant proposes to abandon a portion of West 10th Street between the railroad right-of-way and Thayer Street, the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision (block bounded by Thayer Street, West 10th Street, West 11th Street, and the railroad right-of-way), and the portion of West 11th Street between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way. 2 September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A The applicant notes the facility will include the following uses: • Temporary living quarters — 180 to 200 beds ■ Office space — 5,800 square feet • Educational space — 4,000 square feet • Kitchen and dining areas A Future Land Use Plan amendment has also been filed in association with the proposed development (Item # 15 File No. LU02-08-03). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The portion of the site along the north side of West 10th Street is vacant, grass - covered and fenced. There are no trees on this portion of the site. The area on the south side of West 10th Street is also vacant and grass -covered, with a scattering of trees. This portion of the site is where single family homes once existed, and is 9 to 8 feet above the existing grade of West 20th Street. There is railroad right-of-way along the west boundary of the site, with industrial buildings and single-family residences further west. There are two industrial buildings and a monopole tower to the north, between this site and 1-630. There is an auto salvage yard to the northeast at the southeast corner of Maryland and Thayer Streets. There are four (4) single-family residences immediately east of the proposed building, within the same block, with additional single family residences further south across West 11th Street and east across Thayer Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received several phone calls from persons requesting information on this application. The Capital Hill, the Central High, the Capitol View, the Downtown, the Pine to Woodrow and the Stephen Neighborhood Associations were notified of the Public Hearing as well as residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and all property owners within 200 feet of the site. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS - 1 . ONDITIONS:1. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the corner of West 10th and Thayer Streets. 2. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development. Applicant may petition to abandon West 10th Street. Improvements are required on West 11th Street and on Thayer Street where they abut the property. 3 September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C. NO.: Z -6763-A 3. Submit petition to close alley. 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5_ Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-340-4854 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 6. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 8. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 9. A Grading Permit will be required per Sec. 29-186 (c) & (d). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. ENTERGY: Approved as submitted. ARKLA: Approved as submitted. Southwestern Bell: No comment received. Water: A 3/" is the maximum meter size available off existing water mains. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine if additional public and/or private fire hydrant (s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional details at 918-3752. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is located on Bus Route #3 and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Light Industrial, Industrial, Park / Open Space and Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development to provide temporary lodging, offices, and social services. A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (LU02-08-03). 0 September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM N G. FILE NO.: Z -5763-A City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Stephens Area Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing goal recommends the removal of substandard houses and lots, with an objective of providing a safer living environment. Actions statements support the removal of burnt and unsafe buildings while cleaning vacant weed lots and alleys. Landscape: A total of six (6) percent of the interior of the vehicular use area must be landscaped with interior islands. This takes into account the reduction allowed within the designated "mature area". Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Building Codes: No comment received. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: May 30, 2002 The applicant was present representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed request noting the proposal was exactly the same as the proposal reviewed by the Commission at their November 1999 Public Hearing. Staff stated there were additions needed on the site plan, (building heights, dumpster location, building dimensions, building setbacks). Staff also stated they would need the days and hours of operation, the number of employees and the details of any fencing. Public Works comments were addressed. The applicant was told to either make street improvements to West 10th Street or petition the City for closure. Staff stated a 20 -foot radial dedication would be required at the corner of West 11th Street and Thayer Street, but the intersection would not be reconstructed at this time. Mr. Lawson stated the applicant should try to meet with the neighborhoods prior to the Commission meeting. He stated his staff would contact all the persons involved in the original application, both for and against, and invite them to a community meeting. After the discussion, the Committee then forwarded the proposed rezoning to Planned Office Development, to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has noted that the Public Works comments will be complied with. 5 September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 NO.: Z -6763-A The applicant proposes a six (6) foot high wood -screening fence adjacent to the residential uses. The applicant is also proposing a 7.5 -foot buffer along the east property line (east of proposed building and east of parking area accessed from 11Vest 11th Street). As noted in the Background Section and in Paragraph A of this report, the applicant is requesting abandonment of three (3) pieces of right-of-way as part of the development plan. By endorsing the proposed site development plan, the Commission can recommend approval of the abandonment requests. The applicant will need to file additional paperwork with Public Works and the City Clerk prior to the application being forwarded to the Board of Directors. Otherwise, to staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this application. Staff feels that the proposed development will have no adverse effect on the general area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed POD zoning subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. 2. Staff recommends approval of the following abandonment's: a. West 10th Street, between Thayer Street and the railroad right-of-way b. West 11th Street, between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way c. Alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 20, 2002) Mr. William Willis was present representing the application. There were several objectors present. There were eight (8) Commissioners present. The Chairman stated it was Planning Commission policy to offer a deferral to the applicant when fewer than nine (9) Commissioners were present. The applicant requested a deferral to the August 8, 2002 Public Hearing. The Commission voted to defer the application by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent and 1 vacant position. A September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION Ikir*MGMI STAFF UPDATE: FILE NO.: Z -6763-A The applicant submitted a letter requesting this item be deferred to the September 19, 2002 Planning Commission Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: .. (AUGUST 8, 2002) The applicant was not present representing the application. There were objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request to defer the item to the September 19, 2002 Public Hearing. Chairman Lowry asked if the persons in opposition were opposed to the item being deferred. They stated they were not in opposition of the deferral. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacant position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 19, 2002) Mr. William Willis was present representing the application. There were numerous objectors present. The Land Use Plan amendment Item #C and the rezoning request were discussed simultaneously. Staff presented each item and made a recommendation of approval for each. Mr. William Willis, General Manager of the Union Rescue Mission, was present representing the application. He stated due to the Riverfront development the homeless population had begun to move to the west. He stated the Union Rescue Mission had made the request to locate at this site previously and was requesting endorsement once again. He stated the Union Rescue had searched to find an alternative location but had been unsuccessful. He stated the Union Rescue had looked at nine (9) alternative locations, none of which were suitable for various reasons. He stated the Commission had been given the crime rate for the areas in which the Union Rescue Mission operated and the area, which the Union Rescue Mission wished to locate. He stated the data indicated the crime rate was lower in areas where the Mission was currently operating. He stated the 1990 estimates of homelessness were 280 homeless and in 2000 the number was closer to 1000. He stated the Mission felt the number was more near FA September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION M NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A 2000. He stated additional beds would be needed since the Salvation Army was closing its facility and the City of North Little Rock had bought the land of the current Mission site. He stated there were numerous businesses, homes and churches that support the Mission and their efforts. He stated the Union Rescue was trying to fill a need with a new facility. He stated the Mission was trying to fill a need, which was growing in the direction of the central city already. Mr. Henry Barton, President of the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition of the development. He stated the size of the facility was too big for the neighborhood. He stated the fear of the residents were those who would be released into the neighborhood with out supervision. He stated there were 400+ signatures in opposition of the development. He stated to many unpredictable people visited the Mission. He stated people who had been turned away because of drugs and alcohol would have no place to go but into the neighborhoods. He stated the site selected was not the site to place a Mission of this size. Ms. Ethel Ambrose, President of the Central High Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition of the proposed development. She stated it was not good practice to place a Mission of this size in a fragile neighborhood. She stated there were currently 20 million plus in restoration dollars being spent in the neighborhood. She stated businesses in the area have expressed concerns with security. Ms. Ambrose stated, the area currently houses 20+ treatment facilities. She stated if there was nothing wrong with a Mission then why did other residents not want the Mission in their neighborhood. Mr. Larry Rogers spoke in opposition to the proposed development. He stated he would like to call City staff on their endorsement of the proposal. He stated staff had stated homelessness would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. He stated he would disagree and so would the businesses downtown. Mr. Rogers stated the Westside Jr. High School had recently been purchased and was being renovated. He stated the Arkansas Children's Hospital was investing millions in the neighborhood. He commented on various other projects currently under design or construction within the neighborhood. He requested the Commission not put the neighborhood back by approving the facility. Ms. Susan Leslie, Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association President, spoke in opposition of the proposed application. She stated the Union Rescue never called to discuss the proposed project prior to receiving notification from the city. She stated the group had document how the residents felt through the 400+ signatures on the petitions. She stated 70% of the beds would be transient beds and the holders would be put into the neighborhoods daily. She stated the Mission in North Little Rock currently had 30 beds. She stated this was a much easier number to control than 200 L September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A beds. She stated the proposed development was in conflict with the neighborhoods action plan. She stated the eastern area of the neighborhood was proposed as a park area with walking trails that were proposed to connect to the Millennium Trail. She stated the Salvation Army site was located on the railroad and faced away from residential neighborhoods. She stated the Thrift Store was the same distance from the Salvation Army site as was the Thayer Street location. Ms. Nettie Lawson spoke in opposition,()f the application. She stated she and her husband had lived in the area for 38 years. She stated she and her husband had retired and this was their retirement. She stated in the neighborhood everyone knew each other and felt safe. She stated a neighborhood was not the place for a Mission. She stated the Mission would serve 2000 people, which was to many people to bring into a neighborhood. PD Legoyet spoke in opposition of the proposal. He stated he had recently graduated from college and was returning home. He stated he had plans to buy a home in the area, as did some of his friends. He stated the area had significantly improved. He stated there was a time when the area was riddled with gang activity and a high crime rate. He stated the placement of the Mission would not help property values in the area. Mr. Willis stated he would like to clear up a few comments. He stated Mayor Hayes of North Little Rock was very supportive of the mission. He stated there were more than 25 beds in North Little Rock. He stated there was a great need for the Mission and regardless of the location someone would oppose the location. Commissioner Rahman questioned Mr. Willis on how clients found the mission. Mr. Willis stated from various agencies such as the VA and from the network of homeless persons giving the location. Phil Hill, Director of the Men's program for the Mission, stated there were 30 to 40 people at the Mission on any given night. He stated the Mission had had as many as 200 people in one night but it was an extremely cold night. He stated if a client was suspect then drug and alcohol testing was performed. He stated if a person tested positive then their privileges were taken away leaving them no reason to be in the neighborhood. Commissioner Allen asked if there was a screening process. Mr. Hill stated there was not a background check performed. He stated the person was required to have an id and be drug and alcohol free. Commissioner Berry stated he had attended the three (3) neighborhood meetings conducted and nothing had changed. He asked why the Mission wanted to pursue this location. Mr. Hill stated the other locations were not suitable for various reasons, size, 0 September 19, 2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z -6763-A location, and cost. He stated it was important to have a location that did have access not through the neighborhood. Commissioner Berry stated the land was zoned 1-2 and listed uses which could locate on the site without a hearing. He asked Ms. Ambrose how the neighborhood felt about the possibility of these uses locating on the site. Ms. Ambrose stated the three neighborhoods were in the process of developing a Design Overlay District for the area and they were willing to take a chance. Commissioner Faust questioned how small would the mission have to be to be acceptable. Mr. Barton stated it was the use and the population that would be attracted by the Mission was the neighborhood's concern. Commissioner Nunnley stated the mission was a viable part of the city but not in a residential neighborhood. He stated there was a vagrancy problem on 12th and Woodrow Streets. He stated a residential neighborhood was not the place for a Mission and adding the Mission to this neighborhood was not a good alternative. Commissioner Faust asked if neighborhoods were opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment. Ms. Ambrose stated they were not opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment. Susan Leslie stated Capitol View did not take a stand on the Land Use Plan. After a discussion as to if the two items were tied together and it was determined they were not a motion was made to approve the Land Use Plan amendment. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 recuse. A motion was made to approve the rezoning of the site as requested by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes, 8 noes, 0 absent and 1 recuse. Commission Rector stated he had left the room during the discussion due to a possible conflict of interest. He stated he did have an economic interest in the area with a piece of property he recently acquired. iim