Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUrban Uses 1998 Staff AnalysisSeptember 16, 1999 Item No.: 3 Z-6730 through Z-6737 Owner: Various Applicant: City of Little Rock Location: Cross to College, Arkansas River to 15t' Street Request: Rezone from various in the Downtown area Purpose: Encourage a more urban, pedestrian oriented development pattern of mixed uses. Existing Use: Various STAFF REPORT: As part of the Framework for the Future (Downtown) review, alternative development standards were viewed as necessary. The desire was to achieve a development pattern which was more urban and pedestrian oriented. After discussion the committee reviewing downtown decided a new zone classification was necessary to allow and encourage "urban", "pedestrian friendly" development. A draft ordinance was prepared which attempted to address the issues raised by the committee. The draft was made a part of the committee's final work - the Framework for the Future. The basic tenant was, use should not be a major issue as long as it is inside and does not adversely affect the neighbors. Other important issues are described below. Buildings should be on the street with surface parking limited and only to the rear or side. Sidewalks and streets should encourage pedestrian activity and movement. Residential should be allowed everywhere, with MacArthur Park residential protected. There should be a unique urban feel to downtown with pedestrian friendly buildings and streets. A second committee (three Planning Commissioners, three property owners, three representatives of Downtown Groups (Downtown Partnership, Downtown Neighborhood Association, MacArthur Park Residents Association) and a representative of the League of Women Voters) reviewed the concepts developed by the Framework for the Future committee and a new draft ordinance was developed. September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) Z-6730 through Z-6737 part of the basic zoning code for the entire city is seen as more desirable and workable. In order to ease the change to the new classifications, staff has offered to grant C.U.P.'s with the zone change. These C.U.P. requests will be included as an addendum to allow property owners more time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval ADDENDUM CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR NEW DOWNTOWN ZONING STAFF REPORT: As part of the downtown rezoning effort, property owners were given the opportunity to request conditional use permits. This was done in an attempt to reduce the number of nonconforming uses which might otherwise have occurred. The idea is to allow existing uses to continue to operate as legal uses, if at all possible. In the letters to property owners, they were given the option of providing a legal description and letter asking for a conditional use. Eight request were received and are described below: Z-6370-A Southwest Hotels, C.U.P. for lots 1-12 Block 292 and 1-3 Block 260 Original City. This is an area which currently has "I-2" Light Industrial zoning. The C.U.P. is for an existing warehouse use and expansion on to lots 10-12 Block 292 Original City using similar construction materials. This is the block between Capitol/4t' Street and Cross/Ringo Streets. The C.U.P. further allows for a commercial surface parking lot on lots 1-3 Block 260 Original City. This would replace a lot on lots 10-12 Block 292 Original City. This is the block between Capitol/4th and Ringo/Chester. Both exchanges would be on 4t' Street. The C.U.P. allows "I-2" uses and expansion of the use as noted. Z-6730-B Arkansas Graphics, for lots 1-12 Block 175 Original City. Arkansas Graphics currently occupies half of this block 3 September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 3 related uses. lots. (Cont. ) Z-6730 through Z-6731 The request is to allow 11C-1" uses on these R-4A Z-6734-D, Hundley C.U.P. for lots 1-3 Block 44 Original City. The current zoning is "HR" High Density Residential. The site is the southeast corner of 9th and Cumberland. The owner is requesting Multifamily and "C-1" neighborhood uses based on existing and surrounding uses. Z-6735-A, Parkview Towers C.U.P. for parts of Blocks 56 and 57 Original City. The current zoning is "HR" High Density Residential. The site is located 1200 Cumberland. The use is a elderly retired housing with 128 units. The request is for a conditional use permit for Multifamily. Z-6732-C, Meyer C.U.P, for lots 1-6 Block 8 Rectortown and lots 1-6 Block 3 Woodruff's Addition. The current zoning is 11I-2" Light Industrial. The site is located between Collins/Byrd and 6th/7th Streets. The existing use is Commercial and Industry. The request is for "I-2" uses on these Urban Use lots. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 2, 1999) Because of the changes proposed by this item, the Commission asked that this item be deferred to allow for more time to review the proposal. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to September 16, 1999. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against (Commissioner Adcock absent), the item was deferred. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 16, 1999) Walter Malone, Planning Staff, reviewed the process used to get the draft proposal to this point and then the specifics of the new zoning classifications for Downtown. After review of the specifics within the proposed "Urban Use" and "R-4A" districts, Mr. Malone began the presentation of the eleven requests for conditional uses within the proposed "Urban Use" and "R-4A" areas. These are existing uses and or allow an owner to keep an existing permitted use. There was discussion about the industrial uses in the areas near the Presidential Library site and whether we really wanted to keep them legal uses. Mr. Malone proceeded to review the conditional use requests. 5 September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) Z-6730 through Z-6731 structure on the northwest corner of Ringo and Capitol. The request includes constructing the building to match the existing structure. A C.U.P. for the southeast corner of 4t' and Ringo Streets is requested for a surface commercial lot. This replaces the lot on the southwest corner which is where they intend to construct the warehouse. Commissioner Rahman asked about the height regulations. Mr. Malone reviewed the proposal and the different boundaries for the greater build height subarea. Commissioner Berry also addressed the height area and the Markham Street boundary versus 2nd or 3=d Streets. There was a discussion about limiting height to protect civic spaces. Jeff Hathaway stated support of the overall effort. However, the areas west of Broadway are different. If the intent is to force the "urban pattern", then you need to understand some development will not occur in the area but will go to other parts of the city. West of Broadway is different in development pattern and lot size. The requirement to bring buildings to the street and forbid parking in the front should be relaxed in this area. The area west of Broadway competes with "Mid -Town" and "West Little Rock". Along with this development pattern, a nice monument style sign would add to the overall development. Barbara Patty, thanked the Commission for its work on this. Ms. Patty reviewed her involvement in the process. When visiting other cities, she tends to go to the urban center. From those experiences, what makes a downtown that works are: inviting exteriors, lack of dead space, respect for the pedestrian, civic spaces, mixture of uses, (activities and -life with buildings residential above, commercial below), and clear attractive signage. Ms. Patty read paragraph two of the staff report and then asked the Commission to be sure the following were not a cross-purposes with this paragraph. The changes are in the surface parking, drive-in/drive thru, and dumpster location requirements. Kathy Wells asked that the boundaries of the no height area be changed to 3=d and 8t' Streets on the north and south. No more looming buildings over historic or residential areas. Further that the "transparency" requirement not be reduced from 60 to 35 percent. If people can see and be seen, we will have a safer downtown. The need to make and keep downtown a safer place is one of our aims. 7 September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) Z-6730 through Z-6737 Issues identified as in need of resolution were: The area of greater building Height; transparencies 60 versus 35 percent; drive-thru facilities; and front yard parking. Parking issue - not allowing parking in the front of the building. Commissioner Hawn agreed that the Downtown Zone Committee had discussed this issue and we should try the proposed version. Height area - new boundaries were discussed. The north, south and west boundaries were discussed. Mr. Flake expressed concern about reducing the area since the reduction goes to a base, three stories, which is too restrictive. The discussion included the desirability of having intermediate height areas. The Commission concluded that the higher building area would be from between 9th and 2nd Streets, Scott Street and Broadway with the two blocks from 4th to 6th Streets west of Broadway to the Federal Building. Transparency issue - The staff internally had discussed the issue based on comments from Mr. Flake and others. A third of the fagade seemed more reasonable, because we want to have brick and other materials. Commissioner Rahman pointed out this is a minimum standard and most new buildings are more glass. Even though there was some concern about the change, the commissioners agreed to stay with 35 percent. Drive-thru issue - The change was from not seeing or accessing drive-in/drive-thru from any street to "primary streets". Staff's concern was the effect would be to outlaw the use even though alleys are permissible. The Commission concluded to leave the change though some had concern. Commissioner Hawn moved approval as presented with the resolutions developed by the Commission and to include the Conditional Use Permits presented in the application. By a vote of 10 for 0 against the item was approved. 9 DRAFT VI) Amend Section 36-524. Exceptions/modifications (zoning buffers) - adding: (11) Developments within the Urban Use (UU) District shall provide land use buffers only where abutting single-family and duplex use or zoning. Street buffers shall not be required. Land Use buffer. All sites developed. Modified or enlarged shall provide a land use buffer(s) as follows: 1. Side property lines at five (5) percent of the average width of the lot on both sides; 2: Rear property lines at five (5) percent of the average depth of the lot; 3. The minimum dimension shall be six (6) feet in all instances; 4. The maximum dimension required shall be forty (40) feet in all instances. VII)Adaling two new Zone Districts to Article V District Regulations - Urban Use (UU) and Low Density Residential (R- 4A) SECTION—. URBAN USE DISTRICT (a) General Purpose and Intent. The Urban Use district established by this chapter is designed to assure the continuation of development consistent with a traditional urban form. The Urban Use district is designed to help create a compact, dense, distinguishable core area. The district is established in order to provide for an urban form allowing mid -rise and high rise structures. This District is to provide for the office, civic and business core of the City. Structures within the Urban Use district are encouraged to provide multiple uses within the same structure. The ground or street level of structures should include street oriented activity and pedestrian amenities. The resulting area is to be pedestrian 'urban' oriented. (b) Application of Regulations. The regulations of this District shall apply to new development, redevelopment, expansion of existing development or exterior modifications. Routine repairs and maintenance shall not require compliance with this section. Except for construction of improvements in the public right of way required by the City, and redevelopment or expansion of existing development, all uses, structures or lots which existed on the effective date of this section which do not conform to the standards and guidelines established in this section, shall be treated as nonconforming according to the provisions of Article III of this chapter. DRAFT DRAFT b. Sidewalk sales and daily display or vending that is stored inside the principal business building during closed business hours, smell may be allowed. However, these activities shall not obstruct pedestrian movement, fire lanes, or areas designated for access by the physically impaired. (7) Building orientation. Buildings must be oriented to the street. The primary entrance of the building shall be at street level on the street at the sidewalk. Entrances shall be designed so that the door will not swing beyond the property line. (8) Street -level floor. The ground -level (street fronting) floor of non-residential structures shall have a minimum of 6@ 35 percent transparent or window display. It at least 50 percent of the street -level office and retail space has direct '5ccess to the street, the total building square footage may be increased with additional floor(s) at a rate of 2 square feet for each one square foot of leasable space directly accessible to the street. On the street level the maximum area of sign may also be doubled if the above requirement is met. (9) Projections (all requirements for a franchise remain in place). a. Objects shall not project from the building facade over the public right of way except for awnings and balconies. b. Awnings shall not project more than 5'-0" from the building facade and have a minimum clearance of 9'-0" above the sidewalk. c. Balconies over the public right of way shall have a minimum clearance of 9'-0" above the sidewalk. The maximum projection shall be 4'0". (10) Parking requirements. No off-street parking shall be required. IA DRAFT (e) Height regulations. No building hereafter erected or structurally altered shall exceed a height of three (3) stories or 45 feet, whichever is less. Developments which provide a minimum 20 percent of the gross floor area for residential uses are entitled to a maximum height of five (5) stories or 75 feet, whichever is less. Any structure which is certified by CATA (Central Arkansas Transit Authority) as providing a portion of the structure for mass transit (such as a bus stop, etc.), is entitled to one bonus floor. All building height bonuses are cumulative not to exceed ten (10) stories or 150 feet. In the area bounded by Markham Street on the north, gt# 91h street on the south, Scott Street on the east, and Broadway Street on the west, building height shall be controlled by the Adams Field Airport Zoning Ordinance (section 7-57, height limitations in the Little Rock Code of Ordinances). (t) Area regulations. (1) Front yard. Five foot build to line. If there is an adjacent structure, which is closer than five feet, then the new structure may be built using the line of the pre-existing structure. (In no case may a structure be built in the right-of-way.) A development with an integral accessory use may increase the setback (build -to line) to 20 feet. Along Capitol Avenue, west of Broadway Street and east of Scott Street, the front building line shall be 25 feet. Along Chester Street from 1-630 to La Harpe Boulevard the front building line shall be 10 feet. In no case is the storage or parking of vehicles allowed in the front setback. (2) Rear yard. No setback required except where adjacent to lots containing single family detached structures. In this case the rear yard shall have a set back of not less than twenty-five (25) feet. (3) Side yard. No setback required except where adjacent to lots containing single family detached structures. In this case the side yards shall have a set back of not less than four (4) feet. DRAP1 eo DRAFT (2) Side yard. There shall be a side yard on each side of the building having a width of not less than ten (10) percent of the average width of the lot, not to exceed five (5) feet. (3) Rear yard. There shall be a rear yard having a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet. (4) Lot area regulations. There shall be a lot area of not less than five thousand (5,000) square feet. In addition, there shall be a lot width of not less than fifty (50) feet and a lot depth of not less than one hundred (100) feet. (3) Accessory structures and additions. Accessory structures or principal building additions of conventional on -site construction are permitted by right. Vlll) Modify map to change the area, from Cross to 130 and 1630 to River, to Urban Use and R-4A Districts. J)R A'F1 No September 16, 1999 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m. Date Secretary Chairman September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-1257 NAME: Westview Medical Addition - Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Southwest corner of Kanis Road and Centerview Drive nv..VF:LnpER * ENGINEER: Freeway Park Properties, LLC 100 Morgan Keegan Dr. Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 6.9 acres ZONING: 0-3 White-Daters and Associates 401 S. Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Variance from the ordinance required minimum driveway spacing for the driveways proposed for Lots 1 and 2. A. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to subdivide 6.9 acres of property at the southwest corner of Kanis Road and Centerview Drive into two (2) lots. The area for Lot 1 is proposed to be 2 acres, with Lot 2 being 4.9 acres in size. The property is zoned 0-3 and will allow future office developments. The applicant proposes to final plat the lots one at a time, beginning with Lot 2. No new streets are proposed. September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1257 AP&L: No Comment received. Arkla: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: An acreage charge of $150 per acre will apply in addition to normal charges. Fire Department: No Comment. County Planning: No Comment received. CATA: Very near CATA Route #5 - West Markham; approved for transit purposes as submitted. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No Comment. Landscape Issues: No Comment. G. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff on August 5, 1999. The revised plat addresses most of the concerns as raised by the Subdivision Committee and staff. The revised plat shows the required platted building line for Lot 1, names of abutting recorded subdivisions and names of abutting property owners. The sources of title and the addresses of the property owners for this property need to be shown on a revised plat. The 25 foot building line on Lot 1 along Kanis Road needs to be measured from the new property line, after right-of-way dedication. The revised plat also shows the driveway locations as required. Two (2) one-way drives are shown for Lot 2 along Centerview Drive and two (2) drives are shown for Lot 1, one on Centerview and one on Kanis Road. The applicant is requesting a variance for driveway spacing as the drives do not conform to current ordinance standards. The northernmost drive on Lot 2 is located 75 feet from the north property line (125 foot spacing required) and the southernmost drive is also 75 feet from the south property line (125 foot spacing also required). The spacing between 3 September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: FILE NO.: S-1257 Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D and E of this report. 2. The issue relating to driveway locations must be resolved. Public Works will make a recommendation on the requested variance for driveway spacing prior to the public hearing. 3. The issue relating to in -lieu contribution for traffic signal construction must be resolved. 4. The applicant must submit a revised preliminary plat noting the sources of title, addresses of property owners, and 25 foot building line for Lot 1 measured from the new property line (after right-of-way dedication for Kanis Road). SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JULY 29, 1999) Joe White was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the preliminary plat, pointing out several notations which need to be shown on a revised plat drawing. The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed, specifically driveway locations and traffic signal participation. Mr. White noted that one (1) driveway would be shown on Lot 1 and two (2) driveways on Lot 2. Bob Turner of Public Works, indicated that the driveways would not conform to the ordinance spacing requirements and variances would need to be requested. Traffic signal participation for the intersection of Kanis Road and Centerview Drive was briefly discussed. Mr. White stated that he would meet with the property owner regarding the participation and respond to staff. There being no further issues for discussion, the preliminary plat was forwarded to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 19, 1999) Joe White was present, representing the application. Mr. White requested that this application be deferred to the September 2, 1999 agenda due to the fact that only six (6) commissioners were 5 September 16, 1999 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1257 and Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, also commented on past practices for traffic signal participation, which included consent by the applicant. There was a motion and a second to defer the application in order for the City Attorney to provide more information to the Commission. The motion and second were ultimately withdrawn in order for more discussion regarding the Commission's authority in dealing with the traffic signal issue and the City Attorney's memo and opinion. There was a motion and second to approve the preliminary plat application. There was also a motion and a second to defer the application. It was determined that the motion to defer took precedence over the motion to approve. The motion to defer was passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 3 nays and 1 absent. It was decided that this item would be placed on the agenda for the special called meeting on September 16, 1999. The discussion on this item ended with the Commission requesting additional information and opinion from the City Attorney's office regarding the traffic signal participation with regards to the Commission's authority. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 16, 1999) Joe White was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposed preliminary plat and a recommendation of approval. Staff noted that the only unresolved issue related to the traffic signal participation. Joe White stated that he had nothing to add at this time. Commissioner Downing addressed the Commission. He noted disagreement with the City Attorney's opinion. He discussed the Richardson case and that particular decision. He noted that the decision was for that particular subdivision. He noted that the result of that case was that an application cannot be denied based on language that is not in the ordinance. He stated that the facts of the Richardson case are different from this case and that the ordinance has changed since the Richardson case. Commissioner Downing went on to discuss the City Attorney's opinion. He presented the Commission with copies of specific sections from City ordinances. He quoted from Section 30-216, 30-278 and 30-218. He reviewed definitions of boundary street 7 September 16, 1999 Item No.: 2 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Downtown District Request: Adopt New Plan for Downtown STAFF REPORT: A citizen committee was formed to review the City's Plans for Downtown. This committee worked as four subcommittees to develop general proposals for the future of Downtown in four geographic areas: Capitol (West), Central Business District (Office Core), MacArthur (East) and East of I-30. These groups developed similar concepts; thus one committee was formed out of the four. From their work the Framework for the Future was developed, this document has been presented to the Commission and recommended. The Framework of the Future recommended that the City Land Use Plan be modified. This item is the first step in that process. Three changes are requested to bring the Land Use Plan into line with the recommendations of the Framework for the Future. First, a new land use category is proposed. This category is meant to help create a more traditional urban development form. The exact use is not as important as the design. Pedestrian friendly design and 24-hour activity are important elements. A mix of uses is desirable. The new category would be MXU - "Mixed Use - Urban." The proposed category is as follows: Mixed Use - Urban: This category provides for a mix of residential, office and commercial uses not only in the same block but within the same structure. This category is intended for older "urban" areas to allow dissimilar uses to exist, which support each other to create a vital area. Development should reinforce the urban fabric creating a 24-hour activity area. Using the Planned Zoning District or the Urban Use District, high and moderate density developments that result in a vital (dense) pedestrian oriented area are appropriate. The second change to the Land Use Plan is a complete change of the plan map for District 5 - Downtown. This is an area from the Arkansas River south to I-630 and from the Missouri September 16, 1999 Item No.: 2 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Downtown District Request: Adopt New Plan for Downtown STAFF REPORT: A citizen committee was formed to review the City's Plans for Downtown. This committee worked as four subcommittees to develop general proposals for the future of Downtown in four geographic areas: Capitol (West), Central Business District (Office Core), MacArthur (East) and East of I-30. These groups developed similar concepts; thus one committee was formed out of the four. From their work the Framework for the Future was developed, this document has been presented to the Commission and recommended. The Framework of the Future recommended that the City Land Use Plan be modified. This item is the first step in that process. Three changes are requested to bring the Land Use Plan into line with the recommendations of the Framework for the Future. First, a new land use category is proposed. This category is meant to help create a more traditional urban development form. The exact use is not as important as the design. Pedestrian friendly design and 24-hour activity are important elements. A mix of uses is desirable. The new category would be MXU - "Mixed Use - Urban." The proposed category is as follows: Mixed Use - Urban: This category provides for a mix of residential, office and commercial uses not only in the same block but within the same structure. This category is intended for older "urban" areas to allow dissimilar uses to exist, which support each other to create a vital area. Development should reinforce the urban fabric creating a 24-hour activity area. Using the Planned Zoning District or the Urban Use District, high and moderate density developments that result in a vital (dense) pedestrian oriented area are appropriate. The second change to the Land Use Plan is a complete change of the plan map for District 5 - Downtown. This is an area from the Arkansas River south to I-630 and from the Missouri September 16, 1999 ITEMS NO.: 2 (Cont.) Pacific Rail Line east to I-30. (The current classifications date to 1980.) In this area the new land use classifications would be as shown on the attached sketch and described here. The entire district, except those areas described below, would be shown as the new "MXU" - Mixed Use - Urban category. The following areas would be Public Institutional (PI) State Capitol area - west of Woodlane and south of 3rd Streets; the Federal Buildings - Capital Avenue to 4th Street, Arch Street west to State Street, and City/County Buildings - Broadway/Markham area. The following areas would be shown as Low Density Residential (LDR) : 6th Street to 9th Street from Ferry to Cumberland; and 9th to I-630 from Commerce to alley between Scott and Cumberland. The following areas would be shown as Park/Open Space (PK/OS): MacArthur Park - 9th Street to I-630, McAlmont to Commerce; and Riverfront Park -Arkansas River to Little Rock and Western Railroad Spur. In addition, the northern portion of the I-30 District from I-30 to John and Arkansas River to 3=d Street is changed to Public Institutional from Industrial (the Presidential Library site) and from 3=d Street to 9th Street I-30 to College is changed to Mixed Use - Urban from Industrial and Transition. The third change to the Land Use Plan is a complete replacement of the text for the Downtown District. The new text is from the Framework of the Future. It is basically the vision statement and goals/objectives. The new text would be as follows: DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPALS: Downtown should become a place where people want to live and visit and should have a lasting and recognizable image, distinguishable from all other nearby environments. Because it is the State Capitol and proud symbol of a metropolitan area, Downtown Little Rock has many, opportunities. Downtown should be the financial, office and governmental center of the region and as 2 September 16, 1999 ITEMS NO.: 2 (Cont.) Special design studies should be undertaken and regulations implemented for streets and corridors of community -wide importance. Objective: To support an urban land use form, a fixed transit system is needed. An investment must be made in a fixed transit system for Downtown that effectively connects the different parts of Downtown and moves people within that area. Action Statement: Build a transit infrastructure - fixed routes to serve the Downtown and immediate vicinity. Objective: Residential use is essential for an active and successful Downtown. Because the Downtown , residential area has lost most of its residential units, the City of Little Rock must invest in downtown housing to assist in reviving the area thereby creating housing opportunities for high as well as moderate - income levels. Action Statement: Create development and use incentives for owner occupied, market rate rental, and affordable rental residential developments in Downtown. Objective: Downtown must be actively marketed. In most cities a quasi -public agency does this work. The City must establish (with Downtown property owners) an agency to advance the economic development of Downtown. Action Statement: development agency implementation of Development a quasi -public downtown to market and assist with the projects. Objective: In order to achieve an active Downtown, developments should be mixed use and linked. Action Statement: Using the Framework for the Future document as a reference, establish consensus among quasi -public, City, County, and State entities regarding the vision of Downtown. Implement strategies conducive to the objectives of the established vision. Assist only developments that conform to the Framework guidelines. 4 September 16, 1999 ITEMS NO.: 2 (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 2, 1999) Because of the changes proposed by this item, the Commission asked that the item be deferred to allow more time for reviewing the proposal. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to September 16, 1999. By a vote of 10 for 0 against (Commissioner Adcock absent) the item was deferred. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 16, 1999) Walter Malone, Planning Staff, requested that the Chair recognized people with cards for item 2 or item 3 on each of the items. Mr. Malone proceed with the Land Use Plan Amendment. This brings the Land Use Plan in line with the Downtown Framework document. Mr. Malone reminded the Commission of the Framework committees desires for Downtown. Mr. Malone proceed to review the text and map changes: Addition of definition; map changes and inclusion of the vision statement and goals/objections from the Framework document. There was discussion about the Public/Institutional designation area for the Presidential Library site. Commissioner Nunnley asked about the Low Density Residential (LDR) area shown between 6t' and 9t' Streets on the eastern edge. There was discussion about the planning efforts around the Presidential Library site as well as the use and zoning pattern in the LDR area. Kathy Wells, presidential of Downtown Neighborhood Association, stated she was here to "cheer -you -on" and urge a speedy affirmative vote. At a conference for Downtown revitalization, James Kunstler was scalding in criticism of a block of blank wall. This zoning would work to prevent this. Professor Glasser, University of Arkansas, listed cities which require street -access shops in parking decks. The mixed use is important and parking on Main Street is a problem. Also, use of rooftops is important. On Page 5 of regulations in the height section, the northern boundary should be 3=d Street not Markham. The Committee wanted the skyscrapers back from the Old Statehouse and other public buildings. 6