Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, we're going to go ahead and call the uh January for a planning commission meeting to order. Um we'll go ahead and start off with our normal housekeeping items here of uh Commissioner Black. Will you want to take the role for us please? Miller here. here. Here

we have a quum. We do have a quorum. All right. Everybody had an opportunity to look over the minutes from last year. last the meeting from December. What's your pleasure? Approve this meeting. Okay, we have a motion to approve. Do I hear a second? We have a second to approve the minutes from the December meeting. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Hear none. The motion carried. All right. We don't have any old business. We have new um we have reszoning a property at R1 Single Family Residential to C2 Highway commercial located at 503 East Aspen Lane submitted by Derek Brown on behalf of Gary Scarboro. You have a staff report on that for us?

Yes sir, we do. So this first item is a resoning at 503 East Aspen Lane. Um, currently the existing conditions are that this property has previously served as an auxiliary church office. Um, though the property owner is not the same as the owner for the adjacent church. These offices may have been utilized as housing at one point in time. Um, this location is currently bordered by C2 Highway commercial to the west, northwest, and southwest and R1 single family resident residential in all other directions. To the north is a residential neighborhood that is predominantly single family housing. Um Russellville 7th Day Adventist Church is immediately adjacent to the east and ARDOT District 8 headquarters are located on the opposite side of Aspen Lane to the south. Caddy Corner to the southwest of the property in question is American Homes of Russellville, a mobile manufactured homes retailer. Um immediately west of the property are several large cleared parcels of land that are owned by Baptist Health. Um the applicant is requesting this change to the zone map be made to operate a counseling office that works directly with the Arkansas Baptist Church. Uh because these services would be extended to non-church members and due to the fact that the owners of the adjacent church and these offices are not the same, it cannot be considered a peripheral use of the church. Um the use office medical or professional is not permissible in the R1 zone. This parcel of land, however, is designated as suburban center in the reimagined Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan. The recommended zone for suburban center is C3 largecale and shopping center commercial. However, C2 highway commercial could be a suitable transition for the area since the density in the area is currently low and would avoid complications that may arise from spot zoning. When considering a zone map adjustment, careful consideration needs to be made

in regards to the future and current land use of the area, the comprehensive plan recommendations, and that the request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the property. Future and currently land uses of the area. The property may have been used as a residential dwelling or other offices at one time, but it is not currently and may not have been for some time as it appears to have been built as a duplex, which would not be permitted in this zone. During technical review, the applicant stated that the building was constructed in the 1980s and has been utilized as offices periodically since then. The existing commercial establishments to the west of the property reinforce the commercial nature of this part of the city. A hotel, outpatient clinic, and manufactured homes retailer are larger, more intense uses in close proximity and government offices are dot across the street from the property in question would mirror the applicant's intended use and serve as a transitional area where intensity tapers off for becoming rural residential uses outside of the city limits. An M2 industrial campus further to the southeast. Zoning as C2 highway commercial would be more suitable than C3 large-scale and shopping center commercial at this time due to the fact that the stated use office medical or professional does not require this zone to be able to operate and therefore spot zoning would not be recommended even if it more closely matches the suburban center description. C2 highway commercial zoning would more closely match the current surrounding land land use pattern. Reimagine Russellville 2040 comp plan. This particular piece of property is situated in a transitional area per the reimagined Russellville 240 comp plan where suburban center transitions into institutional campus i.e. the Russellville 7th Day Adventist Church which then in turn will give way to larger residential tracks to the north suburban multif family that will be serviced by the commercial zones. Much of East Aspen Lane is slated for this kind of commercial corridor in the

comprehensive plan. As stated previously, Suburban Center does not necessarily recommend C2 highway commercial, but instead C3 large-scale and shopping center commercial, while C3 would remain the long-term target of this area per the comp plan, zoning this parcel C2 highway commercial would ostensibly encourage further commercial development along this corridor until C3 larges scale and shopping center commercial zoning makes more sense for this area. Finally, value or income potential of the property. While changing a property from a residential zone to a commercial zone typically increases property value by virtue of potential future uses, the applicant does not have the same vested interest in the property itself as they are not the property owner. The applicant's request is considered recommendable by staff primarily due to the fact that the adjacent C2 zone would be more in line with the comprehensive plan than the current zone. note are not solely, excuse me, not solely because the applicant would like to use the property for business purposes. Though the property would be generating income through its use, the structure that is currently on the property is not intended for the current zoning as it is a duplex within an R1 zone. Therefore, staff recommends that the commission forward this application to the city council for approval to reszone the property from R1 single family residential to C2 highway commercial as a result of the findings below. One, the application is in line with the existing and future land uses within the area suburban center. Two, the proposal aligns with the reimagine Russellville 2040 comprehensive plan. And three, reszoning to the C2 zone appears to be appropriate and aligns with the vision outlined in the 2040 comprehensive plan. Are there any questions for staff?

Yes. How does it affect these uh addresses within 200 ft? the residential people.

Sure. So, the residential zone to the north and the northeast from the property in question, um, by the nature of it becoming C2, um, if there is future development of the property, it would require screening, appropriate screening in line with the zoning code, this could be either privacy fence or sufficient vegetation to um, kind of create a buffer between the residential uses and the um, and the commercial uses. Anybody have any questions for Thank you, sir. Thank you.

All right, commissioners. What's your pleasure on this one? Okay, we have a motion. Do I hear a second? Second. We got two seconds. All right. All those in favor acknowledge by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Hearing none. The motion carried. Okay. All right. Item number two, Arizona property R2 medium density residential to C4 neighborhood and quiet business located at 800 Williamson Way. Submitted by Ashton Smith on behalf of Christian and Missionary Alliance. You have a staff report for us on that? Yes. Um, so as stated, this is a another reasonzoning application. Um, pardon me. This request is at 800 Williamson Way and it is a request to go from um, R2, which is medium density residential to C4 neighborhood and quiet business. The existing conditions are that this location is an existing site of Christian and Missionary Alliance Church. It is located within the Oakland neighborhood. This R2 medium density residential property is bordered by um C4 to the south. Properties to the north and west are R2 and the property to the east is zoned C2 highway commercial. This property is requesting to reszone to C4. Properties within this area include two other places of worship, a mixture of single family and duplex dwellings and the Boys and Girls Club. So Gavin kind of laid it out in his um presentation that we have three items that we kind of look at when we look at a resoning. And the first of those is the future and current land uses of the area. Um to the east there is a large area of vacant C2 which you can see up on your screen there highlighted in um kind of that reddishorish color. um and with the potential for commercial development along this corner of Williamson Way and South Knoxville Avenue. Although the western end of Williamson Way is primarily residential in nature, this eastern end serves as a transitional area to the C2 Highway commercial uh zoned area that extends onto South Knoxville Avenue and East 16th Street. as this is located just

west of the commercial door corridor at East 16th and South Knoxville where those uh where there are several businesses including a car wash, several auto oriented businesses including repair garages and a gas station, food trucks, a storage facility, and a pediatric occupational therapy facility. Given the proximity to the commercial corridor along South Knoxville and East 16th to the north of this location, reszoning to C4 neighborhood and quiet business is in alignment with the current and future land uses in the area. Um we do have to consider the reimagine Russell 20 240 comprehensive plan um as a guide for decision-making. It does define this area um with a mixture of future land uses including institutional campus, suburban, multif family, and suburban corridor. Um the subject property in question um falls into the institutional campus area. Uh these are areas that include office complexes, college campuses, large public schools, and religious land use types. Uh the only related zoning listed in the comprehensive plan for institutional campus is the El Paso University zones which are the College Hill, Prairie Creek, and Downtown Crossing zones. Um this is definitely something staff uh noted when we were going through this staff report as something that we're definitely going to need to update in the comprehensive plan as not all institutional campuses um within the city fall within that um area that is appropriate for the El Paso University zoning. Um, so these zones are only permitted in the areas surrounding Arkansas Tech University. However, they are commercial or mixed use in nature. Uh, so staff does concur that reszoning to neighborhood and quiet business would be in line with the comprehensive plan as it is also a um commercial or mixeduse zone in nature. Third and finally, the value or income potential of the property. Transitioning

from R2 medium highdensity residential uh to C4 neighborhood and quiet business typically does increase a property value. However, the intention of this resoning is not to sell the property. Um the property owner has requested this zone map amendment in order to obtain a digital sign via special use permit at this location. Um that is something that you'll see coming in the next few months down the pipeline. um that they are requesting um this resoning in order to be able to obtain that special use permit. Um therefore, the potential increase in uh property value is not the intent of the reszoning. Um additionally, due to this corridor's nature serving as a transition into a more intense commercial development, residential development may not be the highest and best use of the property. As a result, reszoning to C4 neighborhood and quiet business is appropriate and in is in line with the 2040 comprehensive plan. It is staff's recommendation that the commission forward this application to the city council for approval to reszone the property from R2 medium density residential to C4 neighborhood and quiet business as a result of the findings below. Uh the application is in line with existing and future land uses in the area. The proposal aligns with the reimagined Russellville 2040 comp plan and resoning to C4 appears to uh be appropriate and aligns with the visions outlined in the 2040 comprehensive plan. Are there any questions for staff?

It does not. Um, so it is Oh, can you throw There we go. I pointed out myself there for a second. Um, it is just the yellow box there. So, that will kind of be an enclave. I'm not 100% sure who owns that property. Um, it's not currently developed as far as I know. There are residential properties um to the south, but I don't believe that is is part of that. So, um un partner,

no clue. Um unfortunately uh I would assume that larger C2 tract was reszoned and there was a separate owner for that. So that was not done at that point in time would be my understanding. So any other questions?

Yeah. So we did have one of the um houses if you want to throw that up one more time for me. um to the south here, that little residential enclave, there's a little house right there. And we did have them reach out to us. Um once we explained kind of what their intent was, they had no issues. Um I did invite them to the meeting if they had any questions or anything like that. Um but once they understood that the church was still going to be the church there and it wasn't changing the use, they were just looking for that um digital sign eventually. Um they were completely fine with it and that was the only person that did reach out to us about it. Yeah. Anyone else? Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Ashton. Do you have anything you wanted to add or now? What about you, pastor? Is it Okay. All right. Okay. We have a motion to approve. Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second to approve as uh as requested. All those in favor acknowledge by saying I.

Any opposed? Hearing? None. Motion carried. All right. Item number three, vacation of North Jackson Avenue rightway adjacent to lots seven and 12 block 88 of JL Shen division subdivision or JL Shin addition rather submitted by Barrett Associates on behalf of Clarence Harbor and Armando Cuego. Is that did I say that right? Okay. All right. Do you have staff report for us on that?

Yes, sir. Um, like you said, this is a vacation of ride ofway for um a portion, I believe, the 500 block of North Jackson Avenue adjacent to 101 East Street. Um, currently this section of North Jackson Avenue uh only features a gravel drive that leads to the parking lot of an apartment complex owned by Mr. Harbor that is currently being developed on lots 10 through 12 of block 88. Uh there's also a chainlink fence along the lot line of lot, excuse me, lot seven of block 89 that belongs to Mr. Cien Fueos. A drainage ditch runs perpendicular to East E Street towards the back of lot 12 of block 88 and under a gravel drive. This property is zoned R2 medium density residential with all surrounding properties zoned R2 medium density residential. This is primarily a mixed residential community with single family and duplex dwellings. However, there are also various businesses within a C4 neighborhood and quiet business corridor along East Parkway Drive a block south. Immediately to the north of this section of North Jackson Avenue is a closed right ofway that abuts East F Street, which was closed via ordinance 2383 on January 1st, 2021. Caddyy cornered to the to this section of North Jackson Avenue to the southwest is Vicfield. Um when considering a vacation of rightway, the items that need to be considered are um public trust or any effects to public trust, effects to land use and public benefit. Uh what is the impact of the proposed vacation upon the public trust functions of the right of way? Does the vacation impair circulation access, utilities, open space, and or views? This proposal seeks to vacate a 140 foot by 80 foot section of North Jackson Avenue that is currently minimally improved and has no through access to East F Street. The section of North Jackson Avenue immediately north of this proposed

vacation has been vacated since January of 2021. During a site visit, the existing gravel drive was being utilized as an access to the existing drainage ditch and as a back access for garbage collection for the developing apartments. The total area to be vacated is approximately 11,200 square feet to be split evenly between Mr. Harbor and Mr. Sanfueos. There is nothing currently proposed within the area being vacated. However, access to the ditch by maintenance crews could be inhibited without a sufficient access easement being put in place. Uh two, what are the land use impacts regarding the vacation of the rightway? The impact is that the adjacent property owners, Mr. Harbor and Mr. San Fueos will evenly split the vacated section of North Jackson Avenue and bear responsibility for the maintenance and improvement of the vacated area. Uh there is no current use of this area beyond a gravel section of North Jackson Avenue that leads into an existing parking area for lots 10 through 12 of block 88 and as a ditch access for maintenance crews. Staff noted in the submitt letter letter, excuse me, that the applicant stated that the additional area vacated to Mr. Harbor could be made into additional parking for the developing property. However, during a technical review meeting, the applicant stated that this would not be the case and that there is no plan to add an off- streetet parking lot. Applicant did note during the technical review meeting that the gravel driveway may be paved as a part of the access easement. There is currently a chainlink fence on Mr. San Fuego's side of the vacation that would then fall on his property and can be maintained by the property owner. Drainage should not be compromised in the development of Mr. Harbor's side of the vacation. And so a drainage and access easements, drainage and access easements, excuse me, should be established to prevent this. Finally, what public benefit is received by vacating the right of way? Uh retaining both drainage and access easements is in the best interests of the public benefit and the vacation of the minimally improved section of this road with no through passage shall

transfer maintenance of the land to the adjacent property owners. Uh therefore, staff recommends forwarding this application to city council for approval to vacate a 140 foot section of the 80 foot rightway of North Jackson Avenue adjacent to lot 12 of block 88 and lot 7 of block 89 within the JL Shin addition with the following condition. Uh a 10-ft drainage easement is provided and the applicant works directly with city engineers to verify sufficiency of the easement and represent it appropriately on any future surveys. Uh, a 20 foot access easement east of the proposed drainage easement will be provided for maintenance of the drainage ditch and the applicant works directly with city engineers to verify sufficiency of the easement and represent it appropriately on future surveys. Uh, the existing gravel section of North Jackson Avenue is to be made into a paved access. uh as a result of the findings below. There is not an impact to the public trust, land use or effects to the public benefit and no letters from utility companies provided by applicant releasing use of the area to be vacated. Are there any questions for staff?

Thank you. Thank you. Dave, you got you got anything you want to add? Anybody have any questions for Gavin or for Mr. Garza?

Go ahead. Sorry. I would like to note that um uh staff engineer Sawyer Shannon is here also if in case there are any engineering questions that um the uh the commission might have. Okay. Do have one question for you. You said the maintenance will be transferred to the homeowners to maintain a ditch. Would that not be their dish to maintain?

Corre. Well, I I I can see that. Um the access to the drainage ditch would still be necessary for maintenance crews in the event of I would assume, you know, any kind of blockage that might cause flooding downstream somewhere or something to that effect. Um there are still portion of the property that would still need to be maintained by the by the property owner. Um but yes, a lot of that would end up being um access easement and and a drainage easement. Now on the um that's on the west half of the of the vacation. On the east half of the vacation, it would mostly fall outside of that um uh easement zone and would be maintained kind of as an extension of the of Mr. San Fuego's yard. Yeah, of course.

Anything else? Okay. Yeah, go ahead.

Uh, for the record, David Garzo with Barrett and Associates. So, the closure that was done in uh 21, the drainage ement is 15 feet. So, we're going to change that drainage ement south to uh align with that same as 15 feet. So, what we're proposing is 15 and 15. So it'll be 15 foot drainage ement and then 15 foot access easement. That'll give them the whole 30 feet that they were requesting, but we wanted to uh just to keep it the same as what was north. So that's that's all. Okay.

So again, I'm Sawyer Shannon, public works staff engineer. And it was outlined in the draft a 10-ft easement, the last uh draft that I had reviewed. And since then, apparently we have now a 15t drainage easement and a 15 foot access easement, which is in line with what's currently on or in the rideway. So that's pretty much a map of what we use. The drainage ement will be used just to we just maintain flow. Um, and the access easement will be just what it sounds like. It's just for us to access the drainage. Uh, we've recently replaced the culvert on this gravel drive. Um, so probably no needed painting soon, but uh that yes, this that aligns what we need. Make motion to approve 15 access. Is that correct? Okay.

Okay. We have a motion and a second. You got all the all that down. All right. All right. All those in favor acknowledge by saying I. I. Any opposed? Hearing none. The motion carries. All right. And if there is no other business, we are ajourned.