Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Don't get there. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Okay. All right, guys. We're going to go ahead and call the August Planning Commission meeting to order. We've got a couple of housekeeping items we're going to do. Cody, if you will take a roll call for us.

All right. Miller?

Here.

Choate? Here. Mike? Here. Hoffman? Abbott?

Here.

Nuffin? Here. Edgerton?

Here.

Here.

we have a quorum okay mr. chairman mr. real quick I was asked at our agenda prep meeting on Tuesday to remind members of the Planning Commission to please use your microphones they need to plug our mics in and we can hear all right okay everybody had a chance to look at the minutes from last month's meeting If so, I'll entertain a motion to accept those.

Move to approve the minutes. Okay.

We have a motion.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes from the July meeting. All those in favor, acknowledge by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carried. All right. No old business here. We'll start with the new. All right, we have large-scale development located at 89 SR 331 submitted by Barrett & Associates on behalf of Duval Family Partnership, LLC. Victoria, you got a staff report on that?

Yes, sir. So as stated, this is a large-scale development at 89 State Route 331. Existing conditions this is located within the East Main commercial district This is currently the location of Ashley furniture home store It was previously the location of Staples as many of us remember it The property is zoned c2 highway commercial and all surrounding properties are also zoned c2 surrounding uses include a truck stop a vacant truck center a fuel station several restaurants a variety of retail uses and a pool hall and article seven point two point one of the land subdivision development code states that any development containing an existing building or buildings with a combined square footage of fifteen thousand gross square feet or larger triggers a large-scale development process and article seven point two point five states that when the square footage of the proposed building addition or site is less than twenty percent of the existing building or site the project is exempt from the large-scale development regulations this addition however is over that twenty percent threshold and therefore is subject to complete the large-scale development process and the applicant has met all of the checklist items for the land subdivision development code article seven point four for the large-scale development during our site plan review these are items that we will confirm with the building permits article 2.1 0.25 parking there is a large existing striped parking lot but we will get a parking analysis just to confirm that adequate parking will remain again staff does not see any issue with this as they have a large parking lot but that will be part of that site plan review. Article 3.22 commercial building and site design. Commercial building design will be confirmed when we receive elevations and then site design does appear to be met. Article 3.23.13 sidewalks. We just need the applicant to confirm the valuation of the development to confirm that it does not trigger those sidewalk requirements and again we'll do that with site plan review. Article 5 landscaping this development does trigger the landscaping requirements per article 5.3.1 as it is in addition over 20% Article 5.7 street trees requires one street tree every 50 feet of frontage The applicant has met the street tree requirements article 5.8 is the street frontage buffer this is a 10 foot wide buffer and with five trees or five shrubs every 50 feet. The applicant has met the street frontage buffer requirements in regards to planting. However, it does not appear that they will meet the 10 foot in width requirement due to the existing perimeter parking and a variance will be needed to be pursued for that if that 10 foot requirement cannot be met. 5.9 interior parking lot landscaping requires a landscape island every 16 spaces this is not applicable as the applicant is not proposing any new parking at this time and then article 5.10 perimeter buffer this is a requirement to be 5 feet in width and requires one large tree or two small every 50 feet the applicant does appear to have met the perimeter buffer requirements As a result, it is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission approve the large-scale development to allow construction of a new commercial expansion as a result of the findings that the applicant has expressed their commitment to adhere to the zoning regulations, and the applicant demonstrates compliance with the regulations within Section 7 of the Land Subdivision and Development Code. Are there any questions for staff?

So the addition is all on the South side of the building behind McDonald's.

Yes. Thank you. Thank you.

Dave, do you have anything you wanted to add? Okay, Doug, you good? All right. All right. Commissioners, what's your pleasure? Got any questions for anybody, or do you, what's your?

I move we accept it as submitted and recommended by staff.

Okay, we have a motion.

I second.

And a second. We have a motion and a second here to approve this large-scale development, and as recommended by staff. All those in favor, acknowledge by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carried. All right, item number two. Thanks, Doug. All right, vacation of South Utica Avenue, right of way between 2008 West 2nd Street and 2120 West 2nd Street, submitted by Henderson Specialties on behalf of CNC Machinery Incorporated. Gavin, you got a staff report for us on that?

Yes, sir, we do. As stated, this is a vacation of right of way at 2008 East 2nd Street. This is for the entirety of the undeveloped portion of South Utica Avenue. This vacation encompasses the unimproved section of South Utica Avenue's right-of-way between blocks 11, 12, 29, 30, 34, and 35 of the Pointer Edition. Located along South Utica Avenue within the Airport Industrial District, this is currently an unimproved section of the right-of-way. This right-of-way runs between CNC machinery property and city property leased by AmeriCold to the east and Hedersen Specialties to the west before dead-ending at the railroad right-of-way to the south. The zoning for this section of right-of-way and the surrounding properties on the east and west sides is M2 heavy industrial. To the north along the improved section of South Utica Avenue is C2 highway commercial. To the south beyond the railroad right-of-way is R2 medium density residential. The lots south of the railroad right-of-way are currently undeveloped. The intent of this proposal is to vacate this section of right-of-way in order to allow for a new rear access to AmeriCold property. 2008 East 2nd represents the adjacent applicant's address. Should this application be recommended approval by the Planning Commission and subsequently approved by City Council, the right-of-way would split down the middle and be granted to the adjacent property owners, in this case Mr. Henderson of Henderson Specialties, Mr. Corbin of CNC Machinery, and a small portion along the southeastern third of the right of way would go to the city of Russellville at block 34. This would ostensibly provide a modest reduction in truck congestion along East Main Street and South Elmira Avenue. AmeriCode Logistics lease with the city would not be impacted. When considering a vacation, there are three questions that must be addressed during the application process. One, what is the impact of the proposed vacation upon public trust functions of the right-of-way? What are the land use impacts regarding the vacation of right-of-way? And what public benefit is received by vacating the right-of-way? So, starting, what is the impact of the proposed vacation upon public trust functions? This vacation would provide an alternative access to the AmeriCold Industrial Campus for semi-trucks should it be developed and would be managed by adjacent private property owners. The additional access drive could, in theory, reduce the number of trucks needing to use the South Elmira Avenue entrance, providing for some traffic congestion relief at the intersection of East Main and South Elmira. further this right-of-way is not currently improved with any hard surface or aggregate and would be difficult to access by pedestrians additionally the south utica avenue right-of-way dead ends at railroad right-of-way to the south and the property that is part of the miracle lease to the east and so access to pedestrian uses or other opportunities would not be lost should the right-of-way be closed What are the land use impacts regarding the vacation of this right-of-way? Land use impacts should theoretically be minimal. The intent for these pre-dedicated right-of-ways is to be paved and utilized as a street. Since this land is already set aside for this purpose, the impact of paving and utilizing this section of right-of-way after the vacation would be no different than if it were paved by the city, beyond the fact that it would then be for a private use instead of a public use. What public benefit may be received by vacating this right-of-way? Public benefit could be gained by reducing semi-truck congestion along the main thoroughfares of South Elmira Avenue and East Main Street. This could be a two-way benefit in the sense that commuter congestion may be relieved on East Main and South Elmira, and private truckers may experience some relief by virtue of needing to negotiate tight turns during heavy traffic hours less frequently. In light of this, staff does recommend that the commission forward this application to city council for approval to vacate the unimproved portion of South Utica Avenue between blocks 11, 12, 29, 30, 34, and 35 of the pointer addition as a result of the findings that there is not an impact to the public trust, land use, or effects to the public benefit, and that letters from utility companies provided by the applicant release use of the area to be vacated. Are there any questions for staff?

On the utility releases, have we received those? I noticed that we had. We noticed that we did receive them.

We received, I think, a couple of them. I know some utility providers are a little slower than others to respond. I know that during our technical review, City Corporation then and there said they have no interest in this right of way. And I do believe we received Entergy or Summit letters saying that they have no interest in the right of way.

Does the city have any plans to connect any of those two streets together? I mean, there's several it looks like across there in the future.

At this time, there's not anything that we have on the books that I was able to find. Staff did kind of believe that the providing of an access there would kind of be the best use of it at this point in time since it's currently surrounded by single property owners.

Anybody have any further questions for Gavin? Thank you, sir. Thank you all. All right, commissioners, what's your pleasure on this?

I make a motion that we go with the staff recommendations and forward this to city council for approval.

Okay. Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the request to send it on to city council. All those in favor, acknowledge by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carried. Okay. Item number three has been requested that we table by staff. We'll need action on that.

I hear a...

Okay, we have a motion. Second. A second to table this item number three here till further notice. All those in favor acknowledge by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carried. all right item number four rezoning a portion of property of r1 to c4 located at 150 south tulsa submitted by susan heinz hansen you have a staff report on that yes sir did i fillet that name too bad or no i think that's correct so this is a rezoning of a small portion of property at 150 south tulsa avenue so the portion being rezoned is that little yellow box on the screen there

This property currently serves as a dental office. This location is currently bordered by R1 single-family residential to the south, PUD to the west, C2 highway commercial to the northeast, and C4 neighborhood and quiet business to the north and east. To the north is a vacant lot. To the northeast and east are two other medical offices, and to the west is the Walmart neighborhood market. The area of property that the applicant is seeking to rezone is a portion of 50-foot alley that was previously vacated. This applicant is requesting to change the zone map to continue to use her property as a dental office, but the applicant would like to square up the zoning for her pieces of property that she owns. The parcel of land is designated as suburban corridor in the Reimagine Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan. One of the recommended zones for the suburban corridor is the C4 neighborhood and quiet business zone. When considering a rezoning, three questions should be taken into account. The future and current land uses of the area, the Reimagine Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan, and the value or income potential of the property. future and current land uses of the area. The future land use of this property and surrounding areas is the suburban corridor which allows for zones RO, C2, and C4. Squaring this property and making it all the same zone would align with the Reimagine Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan. Bringing this property under one single zone represents best planning practices as it prevents complicated zoning issues that could arise if the property ever underwent redevelopment. The Reimagine Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan, the property is situated again in that suburban corridor prescription that has the recommended zones of RO, C2, and C4. value or income potential of the property transitioning from are one single-family residential to see for neighborhood in quiet business typically increases the property value due to the wider range of potential uses that become available however due to this rezoning area being continued continued use as a dental office this small piece of land that is actually being rezoned uh... the income potential will not change in any significant way uh... to you know be enough to amount for it to be considered the primary reason for the rezoning. Staff does recommend that the commission forward this application to the city council for approval to rezone the property from R1 single family residential to C4 neighborhood and quiet business as a result of the findings that the application is in line with the existing and future land uses within the area, suburban corridor, and rezoning to C4 appears to be appropriate and aligns with the vision outlined in the 2040 comprehensive plan. That is my staff report. Are there any questions?

One question for you. Is the first part of the picture the correct one? One of them goes all the way to the end, and one of them just kind of cuts a chunk out of it.

okay so i think that was done uh...

By one of our interns so they they actually don't own that portion of property I think they tried to get a hold of this property owner that owns the property that butts up immediately to Walmart neighborhood market But they kind of own this strip that fronts Tulsa, but they don't own that portion It's our favorite thing yeah But yeah, so they did try to contact that property owner as far as I know But they weren't able to get them in on this rezoning. So I

any other questions thank you thank you all right what's your pleasure ladies and gentlemen make a motion to approve and forward to city council All right.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve this request to move on to city council here. All those in favor, acknowledge by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carried. All right. Let's move on to the next one. All right. Rezoning a property from R2 to C2 located at 2802 West Main Street, submitted by Carol Collins. Do you have a staff report, Gavin?

Yes, sir, we do. As stated, this is a rezoning at 2802 West Main Street. It's currently the site of Carol Collins' law firm. This is within the West Main District. It's currently the use type of professional office. This property is currently zoned R2 medium density residential and is surrounded to the west and south by C2 Highway Commercial, to the north by other R2 properties, and to the east by one parcel of C4 Neighborhood and Quiet Business. Surrounding uses include single family homes to the north and to the west, a medical office to the east, and various commercial uses to the south, including Humphrey Funeral Service and Underhill Chiropractic. This property has been owned and operated by the applicant as a law firm for the better part of two decades. The applicant was made aware of the property zoning through a business license application for a business owner's subletting space within the existing office space for a similar use type. The applicant expressed concern as they were incorrectly informed by the then planning assistant prior to purchasing in the mid-2000s that the property was zoned commercial. Current planning staff consulted historical maps that are maintained by the city and found that at some point between 1994 and 1999, the property was indeed rezoned from C4 neighborhood and quiet business to R2 medium density residential. Planning staff could not conclude as to why this property rezoned in the first place as records of the rezoning itself could not be located beyond the available historical maps. So when considering a rezoning, there are three questions that should be taken into account. That is the future and current land uses of the area, re-imagine Russellville 2040 comp plan, and value or income potential of the property. Currently, surrounding uses on this portion of West Main Street are overwhelmingly commercial in nature. Interestingly, this is the only property with residential zoning that fronts West Main Street between Seattle Avenue and East Spokane Circle, which is an approximately 1.5 mile stretch of West Main Street. This current zone of R2 medium density residential is not strongly supported by current surrounding uses that front West Main Street. This side of West Main is intended to function as a commercial hub that supports the surrounding residential areas of the D Street neighborhood, the Englewood neighborhood, and the Marina Heights district. For the comp plan, the comprehensive plan prescription for this property is Suburban Corridor. Suburban Corridor supports the RO residential office, C2 highway commercial, and C4 neighborhood and quiet business zones. Staff does concur with the comprehensive plan in this prescription. Finally, value or income potential of the property. Typically, rezoning from residential zones to commercial zones does increase the value of the property due to the wider range of uses that can be implemented. Upon visiting the site, staff did observe a for sale sign near the front door of the office, and during initial conversations with the applicant, IT WAS EXPRESSED THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD PREFER TO BE ZONED C2 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL INSTEAD OF C4 DESPITE THIS BEING THIS HISTORIC ZONE OF THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO ITS REZONING IN THE MID-90S BECAUSE THEY INTEND TO SELL THE PROPERTY AND SO SUBMITTING THE REZONING REQUEST FOR C2 ACCORDINGLY. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD JUST BECAUSE THE STAFF REPORT WAS PRODUCED BEFORE I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT WAS WILLING TO excuse me, to take the property off the market for the time being. Just wanted to note that for the commission. It is also staff's view that commercial zoning makes more sense than the current residential zoning. Staff did find grounds that increasing property value may be a contributing factor in this rezoning request. However, this is clearly not the sole factor in this rezone. In light of all of this, staff does recommend that the commission forward this application to the city council for approval to rezone the property from R2 medium density residential to C2 highway commercial as a result of the findings that the application is in line with existing and future land uses within the area. The proposal aligns with the 2040 comp plan and rezoning to C2 appears to be appropriate and aligns with the vision outlined in the 2040 comp plan. Are there any questions for staff? yes did the applicant say why she wanted it c2 as opposed to c4 which it originally was in our original conversation with the applicant she did express that the goal was ultimately to sell the property um the staff did propose c4 initially because c4 was the historic zone of the property and it was our understanding that they THEY BELIEVE THAT IT WAS ONE ZONE FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS, WHEN IN REALITY, IT HAD REZONED PRIOR TO THEIR PURCHASING THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHY STAFF INITIALLY RECOMMENDED THE C-4, BUT WE GO WITH THE, ANY TIME WE GET AN APPLICATION FOR A REZONE, WE GO WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND THEN GO FROM THERE.

OKAY, I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S ONLY TWO PROPERTIES IN BETWEEN HASTINGS AND WHATEVER THAT OTHER STREET IS. Fairbanks and Hastings, it's just that property and the eye doctor.

On that front West Main?

On that front West Main. Correct. Between those two streets.

Correct.

And from what I can tell, the Leblon came in as a C4.

Yeah, that property has been C4 as far back as Arizona.

And put a business there with the understanding that there was a C4 next to him, I would imagine, or an R2. And I'm thinking it would be too permissive to do a C2 next door to that business.

From staff's perspective, the amount of C2 surrounding the property and the fact that the prescription is suburban corridor already for that entire strip of West Main was why we were able to support the applicant's request for C2. That's from staff's perspective.

Any other questions? Tell me, what's the top two or three between two and C2, or yeah, two and four?

Can you say that one more time? I'm so sorry.

What's the differences between the two and the four?

Sure, so C2 is highway commercial. That's probably our second most impactful use behind C3. C2 can be, you know, I believe we've had conversations recently about what's in C2. We can have, you know, yeah, right? It could be anything from, you know, A fuel sales service station to car sales to even a small quarry is permissible in a C2 versus a C4 is much more mixed use oriented. So things of office use types or even a dental facility would be permissible in a C4 alongside residential uses as well.

All right, I'm just trying to pull up the GIS. We're good all the way around it. It fits within the confines of the neighborhood.

For that stretch of Westman, yeah.

I mean, I know the ultimate goal is to sell the property, but I mean, I feel like we put a burden on the property owner for everything around it, and they're requesting to change the status of it at this point. If you're recommending it, I would make a motion for approval as presented.

Okay. We have a motion. Do I hear a second?

I'll second.

All right. We have a motion and a second to approve this rezoning request. Senate on City Council. All those in favor, acknowledge the saying aye. Any opposed?

No.

OK. We have one no. That means I have to vote, and I'll say aye as well. So. Do we need one more call? Yes, please.

Miller.

Aye.

Cho. Aye. Black. Aye. Hatley. Aye. Duffield.

Yes.

Clear.

No.

Motion passes. All right. You guys have it? All right. Okay. The next item we have here is rezoning a property from a C2 to R2 located at 1311 through 1315 East 16th, submitted by Barrett & Associates on behalf of Janie and Laura Lee Morris Walker. Do you have a staff report on that?

Yes, sir. So this is another rezoning tonight at 1311 and 1315 East 16th Street. This is the existing location of two vacant buildings. The building at 1311 East 16th appears to have been previously utilized as a commercial building in the structure at 1315 East 16th appears to have previously been utilized as a single family home. Surrounding uses include single-family homes zoned R2 and C2, a non-profit organization, a house of worship, and Hickey Park Baseball Complex. Properties to the north of these are zoned C2 Highway Commercial and R2 Medium Density Residential. Properties to the southeast and west are zoned C2 Highway Commercial. Again, three things must be considered for rezoning future and current land uses of the area. The reimagined Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan and the value or income potential of the property. future and currently abuses at this stretch of the sixteenth does serve as kind of a transitional zone from the more commercial side of the sixteenth to at the more residential side as you go east uh... immediately to the north of these properties is a residential subdivision and although the subdivision is comprised of single-family homes it is owned are to medium density residential The properties in question have not been utilized in a commercial manner in quite some time, and this corridor is not seeing much interest when it comes to commercial development at this time. These properties are within walking distance of a house of worship, Hickey Park, and Russellville High School. As a result, activating this space for much needed missing middle housing would likely be the highest and best use of the property. Reimagine Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan defines this area as suburban corridor and suburban single-family as you can see It's kind of kind of hard to tell one of them is purple and one of them is blue up on the screen but one of the properties is within that suburban corridor section and one is within the suburban single-family and As staff has discussed many times recently, the future land use map does need some updating as far as the comp plan goes, and it is on staff's radar, but unfortunately we've got a lot of plates spinning right now, so we are working to get to that to update it. But staff has identified this area as one of the areas that does need updating as part of the comprehensive plan. While suburban corridor related uses include RO, C2, and C4, that could be appropriate. This stretch of East 16th Street again is a transitional area from commercial to more residential uses. The comprehensive plan designation of suburban single family only has the related zones of R1, which does not match the current zoning designation pattern of the properties to the north, which are R2. while this rezoning would not exactly match the comprehensive plan prescriptions it is unlikely that this property will be utilized as commercial space in the near future and spot zoning two small properties to r1 would not be recommended by staff these properties being zoned r2 better matches the residential nature of the subdivision to the north additionally development of this property in a residential manner even if it is small scale multi-family will be less impactful to the existing subdivision than redevelopment of the property for a commercial use. Value or income potential of the property. Changing the property from commercial to residential typically would not increase the property value. Staff does recognize that utilizing the property for small scale multi-family housing, the property could increase the value or income potential of the property in the long term. Staff does not have any objection to rezoning these properties for that use. Staff does not believe that rezoning from C2 to R2 would constitute any significant increase in property value by virtue of rezoning alone. As a result, staff does recommend that the Commission forward this application to the City Council for approval to rezone the property from C2 Highway Commercial to R2 Medium Density Residential as a result of the findings that this rezoning could be in line with future and current land uses in the area Adjacent properties are zoned in line with this proposal and while it might not exactly match the future Land-use plan staff believes this would be the highest and best use of the property and less impactful to surrounding residential uses That is my staff report. Are there any questions?

Thank you You have any questions Okay, what's your pleasure, ladies, gentlemen?

Move it forward to the City Council, as suggested.

Okay.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve this request to send it on to City Council. All those in favor, acknowledge by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carried. Okay. All right, next. We are in the rezoning business tonight, gentlemen, ladies. Rezoning a property from M2 to WN. located at 400 block of Chesney Polar Drive, submitted by Barrett & Associates on behalf of Real Practices Incorporated. Gavin, you got a staff report on that? Yes, sir, I do.

As stated, this is a rezoning located at the 400 block of Chesney Polar Drive, that is South Chesney Polar Drive, within the West Main District. It's currently a vacant lot. The existing zoning of the property and properties to the north is M2, heavy industrial, with a small spot zone of C4 neighborhood and quiet business. To the south and west is C2 Highway Commercial Zoning and to the south and east is largely C4 Neighborhood and Quiet Business. On the east side of Phoenix Avenue is a patch of C3 Large Scale and Shopping Center Commercial Zone. This property is bound to the north by railroad right of way and south by a parking lot and various offices that are medical or dental in nature. To the west are various construction storage facilities and to the east is Phoenix Avenue and an RV storage lot. Uses to the south and east are largely office or single family residential in nature. Finally, St. Mary's Medical Center complex is just south of this property. This property is the proposed site of a new walkable neighborhood. Per the Russellville zoning code, just because walkable neighborhood is not something that we see every day and it's relatively new, the WN district is intended to focus on creation of safe, connected neighborhoods that allow multimodal accessibility through small scale urban form supported by a smaller lot size requirement. The focus of this area is primarily residential, but institutional and some commercial uses will be incorporated and are anticipated to provide services to the surrounding residential uses. For non-residential uses, the structure is limited to a size that is compatible with the surrounding development and uses. This section of the West Main District is roughly one block away from St. Mary's Medical Center, one of the largest employers in the city of Russellville, which can be reached with a five minute walk. The current end of Chessie Puller Drive is approximately a 15 minute walk from two different large grocers, Kroger and Walmart neighborhood market via Phoenix Avenue and West Main Street. There are also multiple places of worship within a 10 minute walk from the area proposed to be rezoned. Additionally, it is an approximately five minute walk from an existing food truck plaza located on West C Street and an approximately 20 minute walk from Russellville's historic downtown via Phoenix Avenue and West Main Street. Finally, ATU campus can be reached via a 30 minute walk or an approximately 10 minute bike ride. Supporting additional modes of travel would be the close proximity to established bike lanes, as well as the schoolhouse trail, which begins adjacent to the nearby Kroger. Soft surface trail plans currently being discussed by city staff could bring additional options for those looking to use bikes as their predominant mode of transport. So, as has been stated several times tonight, when considering a rezoning, there are three questions that are usually taken into account. That is the future and current land use of the area, the reimagined Russellville comp plan, and the value or income potential of the property. For the future and current land uses, the current zoning of M2 Heavy Industrial does not perfectly match with existing land use patterns. To the west of this property are several construction storage warehouses that also house construction offices. There are other residential uses, including single family homes and duplexes that orbit, so to speak, the St. Mary's Medical Center in similar proximity to this property. North of the railroad right-of-way is largely underdeveloped, except for a large place of worship church being constructed at this time. This area of town is largely a patchwork of different uses and zones that are broadly harmonious with one another despite this. North of the railroad right-of-way is other M2 zone properties. However, this also might not match the current land use patterns in the area, given its overall proximity to residential, parochial, and scholastic uses nearby. It should also be noted that this property does lie within the 500-year floodplain. Per the floodplain manager, this represents a 0.2% risk of flooding annually, not once per 500 years. And available flood data indicates portions of the property could be inundated with two to four feet of water in the event a 500-year flood does occur. The developer of this property is working with the city floodplain manager and has expressed to staff that parts of the development will be modestly raised. For the Russellville comp plan, the comp plan prescription for this property is, once again, suburban corridor. The suburban corridor does not recommend the WN zone. However, the walkable neighborhood zone did not exist at the time of adoption of the reimagined Russellville comp plan back in 2020. Recommended zones include RO, residential office, C2, highway commercial, and C4, neighborhood and quiet business. Despite this, staff has held for some time, as has been stated, that areas of the comprehensive plan should be looked at for potential updates, and staff does believe that this area of town may be due for a reexamination for prescriptive areas. Staff would also like to note that the C4 neighborhood and quiet business serves as another lower impact zone geared towards mixed use, as both zones allow for a mix of commercial and residential uses with the walkable neighborhood zone featuring more options for residential developments. Finally, value or income potential of the property. When compared to the existing M2 heavy industrial zoning, rezoning to WN walkable neighborhood may not necessarily increase the property value and would be dependent on the development itself. Industrial zones typically provide a wider range of potential uses that are geared towards large scale manufacturing or other profitable enterprises similar in nature. Staff does not believe that rezoning from the M2 zone to the WN zone would constitute any significant increase in property value by virtue of the rezoning alone. IN LIGHT OF ALL OF THIS, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND THAT THE COMMISSION FORWARD THIS APPLICATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM M2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL TO WN WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A RESULT OF THE FINDINGS THAT THE APPLICATION IS IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USES WITHIN THE AREA. THE PROPOSAL ALIGNS WITH THE REIMAGINED RUSSELLVILLE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REZONING TO THE WN WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD ZONE APPEARS TO BE APPROPRIATE AND ALIGNS WITH THE VISION OUTLINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Are there any questions for staff?

Gavin, just given some of the recent conversations we have with the flood stuff, just so we don't make life difficult on Dave later.

are there any conditions or anything that you guys have out there or anything that we need to do from this commission's perspective to make sure that we are putting the guardrails in place to be able to swiftly move this through so someone doesn't have to come back through later on sure um from the planning commission's perspective i don't i'm not really sure i do know from board of adjustments perspective there would be things because if there were you know the city floodplain manager kind of manages how development is supposed to go within our flood zones in the city, the low-lying zones, specifically the 500-year zone. For this particular property, again, similar to the other one that we had recently come through Board of Adjustment, I think that maybe a training for Board of Adjustment to properly identify when a variance for floodplain would be appropriate and when it wouldn't be appropriate could be called for. I would be happy to have that discussion with the city floodplain manager. Thank you. Thank you.

what is your pleasure ladies and gentlemen i'll move be approved all right we have a motion and a second to approve this and send it on city council all those in favor acknowledge by saying aye Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carried. Okay. Dave, did you have anything? We're already voted on now. John, did you have anything you wanted to? Y'all good?

Okay.

All right. Last item up for bid. Here we go. I have a zone text amendment to adopt. Propose changes to the Russell zoning code submitted by the city of Russellville. Talk to us, Gavin. What do you got there?

Yes, sir. As stated, this is the zone text amendment from our most recent long-range planning meeting. As a forward amendments to the zoning code shall be considered after the long-range planning committee LRPC has reviewed to confirm that updates proposed are in alignment with the reimagined Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan and other applicable city regulations and will forward to the Commission for consideration after being thoroughly reviewed by the LRPC The LRPC meets quarterly to review and periodically update the zoning or land subdivision and development codes. On June 11th, 2026, the LRPC met to discuss proposed changes. The following items were recommended by the committee to be advanced to the planning commission for consideration. Article 3.11.2, vehicles on premises. This update is intended to allow for pragmatic enforceability of existing regulations on motorhome storage in front yard areas of private residences by changing the allowable time for a motorhome to be stored in the front yard from seven consecutive days to seven days in a calendar month. Further, this amendment will also create new regulations regarding the quantity of automobiles that can be stored on a property where they are in view of public rights-of-way. Article 3.23.2, sidewalks applicability. This update creates guiding language for developers to refer to the Russellville Connected Trails System Master Plan when developing on identified trails corridors for side path standards where applicable. article six point one point one off-street parking requirements minimum standards this update creates a new parking space reduction option for multi-family developments that consists primarily of single bedroom or studio units article ten administration and enforcement this update adds a new section of code under article ten that clarifies regardless of what department that it is housed under that the city code enforcement officers shall serve as the enforcing officials of this zoning code. Finally, article 14, area requirements. This update rectifies a contradiction in the area requirements table for the R2 zone that specified maximum density for five plus unit multi-family developments when developments of this nature are not currently permissible in the R2 zone. It is staff's recommendation that this application be forwarded to City Council with the recommendation of approval in regards to the updates to Articles 3.11.2, 3.23.2, 6.1.1, 10, and 14 of the Russellville Zoning Code. Based on the findings that the LRPC recommends these additions and updates, the updates provide clear guidance to staff. The changes are consistent with the objectives outlined in the Reimagine Russellville 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the Russellville Zoning Code. Are there any questions for staff?

Thank you, Gavin.

Thank you.

We do have somebody signed up to speak on it. I don't know if we got that answered before the meeting started or not, Paul. I mean, some of this stuff has been brought up or you see the changes that are going to be proposed to long range. Is there anything you'd like to add to that? Step up to the microphone and state your name for the record, sir, if you would.

My name's Paul Baldwin. In reference to your 311.2, the only thing that they were looking to recommend to change was the seven-day rule. If you look at 311.2, the title of that rule, of that zoning thing, says storage and parking trailers, motorhomes, commercial vehicles, and recreational vehicles. If you look under the sub of that, they have provisions. There's eight of them. Under those eight provisions, motorhomes is not mentioned. Only commercial vehicles. and uh before they uh you know for commercial vehicles they have a a provision says that it has to be less than nine if they're less than nine feet in height they're able to park there if they're over nine feet in height they're not a lot of motor homes are 10 11 feet 11 and a half on some of them on the larger ones uh it also states that they can't be more than 26 foot in length some of these motor homes that are parked in the neighborhoods are 28 to 30 feet their larger motor homes uh one other thing that they used to have in this uh code was a weight limit it says if it was over two tons it was not permissible to be parked in a residential neighborhood that's been taken out as well i just wish you would take consideration to look at those additions to just not just the seven day rule Because that doesn't take care of a motorhome driving through a neighborhood and having low-lying wires or low-hanging wires, and they snatch the wires off the poles or snatch it off somebody's house. That's happened in our neighborhood. We've had that happen before. The other thing is, by them bringing in 14,000, 15,000-pound vehicles in our neighborhood, it's turning roads up. our road is under for resurfacing in the next year or so but i mean it's just they've done built it up so much now they're gonna have to cut it down six inches to make it good but the motorhomes are in our in they're not only in our neighborhood in my neighborhood they're all over the city the the rules that are on the books now They're not being followed. And nobody's enforcing them. They're being parked next to the roads. They're being parked in the easements next to the road. Sometimes they're even parked in the road. That's what I wish you'd take consideration in that 311.2 to add those additional restrictions on motorhomes coming into the residential neighborhoods.

Okay. Just so you know, the protocol on that, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I do want to say that protocol is go to the city, and you talk to the planner about that, and then he can get it put in front of the right people to get it looked at and get it evaluated and voted in or at least brought up in a meeting where we can act on that. So we're not a governing body. We're here to sharpen the pencil for city councils while we're doing it. We're a filter. I understand. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

I have a question. So the new proposed updates, are they enforceable?

Yes, ma'am. Yes. Maybe in which specific one? Just all of them. Yes.

Are they being enforced?

My understanding is that yes, they are being enforced and that these new rules can be enforced when, because they're not, you know, like a commercial building design, we don't, you know, there's no grandfathering in with these proposed updates. They can be enforced immediately.

All right. Is there any action needs taken on this? Are you just advising us on this?

I think you guys will need to forward with a recommendation to city council. Am I correct?

All right. You heard the man. Let's get to work here, guys. Anybody have a recommendation on this?

I would make a motion for approval as presented.

All right.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to send this forward to city council. All those in favor, acknowledge by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion carried. All right. And if there is no other, I want to say I'm sorry to John and today, both. I didn't, I should have given you guys a time to chat there at the end of item number seven there, but it went through just the same. So, all right. We are adjourned.