Planning Commission

Russellville Planning Commission Minutes September 25, 2017 @ 5:30 p.m. The Russellville Planning Commission held its regular meeting on Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:30 p.m. in the Russellville City Hall Council Chambers. Members Present Chairman Dennis Boyd Nathan Barber Secretary Wendell Miller Shirley Hatley Karen Yarbrough Steve Hubbard John Whiteside Frank Russenberger Council Liaison Eric Westcott Members Absent Vice-Chair Peggy Stratton Also present: Mayor Randy Horton, City Attorney Trey Smith, Fire Marshall Setian, Jim Lynch/City Corp, Zayne Bryson/City Corp, Planner James Walden, Lequitta Jones Planning Assistant, Roger Boskus/MBL Architects, Dave Garza/Barrett & Associates Inc., Betty E. Tucker, Don Stout/Keener Construction. Welcome The First Order of Business was a request to review and approve the August 28, 2017 minutes. Commissioner Miller made the motion to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by Commission Hatley The Second Order of Business was a public hearing requesting review and a recommendation of approval to rezone property presently R-O (Residential Office) to C-2 (Highway Commercial) for property located at 4340 North Arkansas Avenue. Submitted by Cliff Goodin. (ZO.17.09.207) Planner Walden said the recent use of the 7.56-acre property is vacant. The request is to rezone from R-O to C-2 to accommodate future commercial development. Staff Comments: 1. There are four properties south zoned C-2. The commercial development would not be out of place in this northern area of the city. 2. Despite adjacent zoning, the lot is far from all residential areas. There are very few residences currently in the immediate surrounding areas. 3. The petitioner has no plans for development. The Comprehensive Plan indicates single-family residential (4-8 units per acre) for this property and a small commercial node at Shiloh Road. However, a great deal of commercial zoning has been granted along this portion of North Arkansas Avenue establishing a precedent in this case where I believe there will likely be a continuation of further commercial development along the remainder of the corridor. The recommendation for action is approval. The rezoning wouldn’t likely harm adjacent property and continues a precedent of allowing commercial zoning along the frontage of North Arkansas Avenue. Bucky Croom, on behalf of Cliff Goodin, said he had nothing more to add. Chairman Boyd opened the public hearing. No comments were provided. Commissioner Miller made the motion to approve the C-2 zoning. Commissioner Hubbard seconded the motion and passed unanimously. NOTE: Chairman Boyd recused himself from Agenda Item 3 because his wife is related to the applicants. Secretary Miller moderated this item due to the absence of Vice-Chair Stratton. The Third Order of Business was a request to close a portion of South Frankfort Street (ROW) running between 500 Block East 11th Street and 500 Block East 12th Street and D&R Railroad (Block 5 Oakland Heights Addition). Submitted by Sarah Keathley, Mary Clow, and D & R Railroad. (ST.17.09.84) Planner Walden said this request is to vacate a portion of a right-of-way (ROW) of Frankfort Avenue at 510 East 11th Street (along lots 9-10). The current use is one single family home that is zoned R-2. This ROW has been previously encroached upon by construction by the applicant’s relatives. The necessity of this application is to get clear title to the property in order to sell the property. Staff Comments: 1. There are no utilities in the ROW. 2. The applicant has stated this was a relative’s house. The relative worked for the D&R railroad and had a gentleman’s agreement to encroach upon the D&R right-of way. It does not appear the city has ever taken any enforcement action to prevent any encroachment upon the Frankfort Avenue ROW. 3. The ROW is not needed by the city and the city deems a future extension of Frankfort Avenue unfeasible and unnecessary. 4. CenterPoint Energy, Entergy, D&R Railroad and City Corp have expressed no opposition to closure of the ROW. The recommendation for action is approval. The ROW is not needed for present of future use by the city or any utility providers. The closure will not harm the city and is necessary for sale of the existing structure on the site. Commissioner Barber made the motion to approve the request. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Yarbrough and approved unanimously. 2 The Fourth Order of Business was a public hearing requesting review and a recommendation of approval to rezone property presently M-2 (Heavy Industrial) to C-2 (Highway Commercial) for property located in the 200 Block of South Pittsburg. Submitted by Dave Garza of Barrett & Associates on behalf of Superior Properties. (ZO.17.09.208) Planner Walden said this property is currently used as a gravel storage lot for vehicles. It is zoned M-2. The property consists of 1.6 acres. The applicant desires to develop the area into a self- storage facility. The adjacent property to the southeast is also held by Superior Properties. Staff Comments: 1. The majority of zoning to the north is C-2. The zoning is M-2 to the east and west. 2. Many properties in the area are former industrial structures and many are transitioning to some form of commercial use. 3. A self-storage facility is permitted in a C-2 zoning district through the special permit process. 4. C-2 zoning would not likely have any negative impact on adjacent property. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan calls for industrial use of the site. The immediately adjacent use in the Comprehensive Plan is highway commercial. The commercial use is of less intensity and should not harm adjacent property or development of the area. The recommendation for action is approval. This approval would allow downzoning of the site and bring its land use in line with the ongoing trend for the area. Dave Garza, on behalf of Superior Properties, said this request came about by some of their employees needing storage so they decided to build a storage unit in the back; however, it doesn’t fit the zoning. Their plan right now is to build one unit in the southwest corner. It is primarily for their use and employee use. In order to do that they had to request rezoning the property to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit. This will be done in phases. We are going to be requesting attaching a variance for gravel on the lot instead of asphalt for drainage purposes. Chairman Boyd asked if the staff received any comments from surrounding property owners regarding this request. Engineer Jones said he did receive a call today from an adjoining property owner that actually lives out of town. He was concerned about blocking of the railroad ditch that runs adjacent to the railroad. Once I assured him that this project would not encroach on that railroad ditch, he was fine with it. Chairman Boyd opened the public hearing. Ms. Betty Tucker, property owner to the west of this property, said that Oswago Street runs in between my property. My question was if it is zoned M-2, it is already zoned for a self-storage. Why would you change to a C-2? Engineer Jones explained that the setbacks are different in a C-2 zone versus M-2. The applicant wanted to take advantage of the reduced setbacks. One of the conditions of the C-2 zoning is they have to submit a Special Use Permit. They would be allowed to build self-storage in the existing zoning without a Special Use Permit. Ms. Tucker said we need 3 help on drainage back there on that railroad because we get quite a bit of water when it rains. When it floods, it floods the property but it doesn’t get in the buildings. Commissioner Hubbard asked Fire Marshal Setian what his thoughts were in regard to graveled parking. Mr. Setian said the fire code says as long as the surface can handle 75,000 pounds it doesn’t require pavement. If we can get some kind of report that says it can handle 75,000 pounds on gravel, we are good to go with it. Council Liaison Westcott asked if the access to this property would be off of South Pittsburg or are they planning to develop that little grassy lot to have access off of East 2nd Street. Planner Walden said initially the access will be off of South Pittsburg. In the future, it could come off of 2nd Street. At the present, however, it will be off of South Pittsburg. Mr. Westcott asked if there was going to be any difficulty the way the entrance is laid out right now for the fire trucks to access the site from South Pittsburg. Planner Walden said that is something we are going to have to address at the Site Plan phase. They will have to submit a Site Plan associated with this. Commissioner Hatley made the motion to approve the C-2 zoning. Commissioner Hubbard seconded the motion and passed unanimously. The Fifth Order of Business was a public hearing requesting review and a recommendation of approval for a Special Use Permit to operate a self-storage facility for property located in the 200 Block of South Pittsburg in a C-2. Submitted by Dave Garza of Barrett & Associates on behalf of Superior Properties. (SP.17.09.157) Planner Walden said this request was for approval of a Special Use Permit that would allow the property to be redeveloped into a self-storage facility. A total of eight structures are planned to be constructed on a plot of land approximately 1.6 acres in size. The construction will be phased with one structure currently planned. Staff Comments: 1. This facility will not be opened to the public at the present. It will only be accessed by the employees of Superior Properties. There are no hours of operation. 2. There is no landscaping plan in place. 3. The entrance will be off of Pittsburg from the Superior Properties property. 4. We will require a one-lot plat on the property to convey any required drainage and utility easements. That will be handled with the Site Plan submittal. The site will have a perimeter fence which will be one of the conditions. 5. The developer’s intention is not to pave inside the fenced area, which may require a variance at the time of the Site Plan review. Since it is not publicly accessed I don’t think it would be treated as a required parking area. So that may be something we list as a condition on the approval. 6. The spacing between structures will be addressed at the Site Plan submittal stage. 7. Site will be subject to Site Plan review due to the fact that we did not get a full Site Plan with the Special Use Permit application. 4 Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan calls for industrial use of the site. However, for the same reasons that we determined commercial zoning to be compatible with a self-storage facility, now based on the intent of your previous vote, it follows that this particular use would be complimentary to that area, not likely to negatively impact adjacent industrial uses. The recommendation for action is approval with conditions: 1. Require a minimum 10’ landscape buffer along 2nd Street frontage. 2. Require perimeter fencing to be decorative along 2nd Street or black chain link fencing in that area. 3. Allowing gravel parking in the site. Chairman Boyd noted that this item was a continuation of our public hearing from the previous item. No comments were offered by members of the public. Chairman Boyd asked Engineer Jones if he was okay with the gravel parking. Mr. Jones stated, “yes.” Commissioner Russenberger questioned Mr. Jones that even considering the ultimate design which would include public access, he wanted to confirm that Mr. Jones was still satisfied with gravel parking. Engineer Jones said it is fairly common for mini-storages to have gravel drives between the mini storage units themselves. In this case in particular, considering some of the drainage issues that we have, I would prefer that we not have any unnecessary hard surface additions to that area. Yes, I’m fine with it. Chairman Boyd asked if we would get the commercial design standards and all with the Site Plan review whenever that happens. Planner Walden said the structure they are currently planning to build at present (the first of eight eventual structures) is located on the very southwest portion of the property so the visibility from the street will be extremely limited. Once those structures are built up towards 2nd Street, the design standard will be addressed at that point. The city staff will take it from here and proceed through the site-plan review process. Issues with drainage, zoning requirements, and access concerns will be addressed during Site Plan review. We did want to start out with a certain level of conditions that would make it look better from the exterior and minimize the impact on adjacent property. Commissioner Barber asked if there were any comments from adjoining landowners either negative or positive. Engineer Jones said “no.” Commissioner Miller made the motion to approve with the three conditions discussed: 1) 10’ landscape buffer along 2nd Street, 2) decorative or black chain link fence along 2nd Street, (3) gravel parking. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Yarbrough and passed unanimously. The Sixth Order of Business was a request for discussion and action on the El Paso Area Plan and Zoning. Planner Walden said this is the next step -- actually defining some zoning standards for that corridor. Last week we had a meeting with the consultant in order to take a look at this 5 plan/proposed zoning and we worked through a lot of the issues pertaining to these particular zoning standards. I think we have pretty well got it nailed down to where we are comfortable with it. To give you an idea, it breaks down the area between the railroad and the university into three separate character zones: 1. College Hill 2. Prairie Creek 3. Downtown Crossing This proposal recommends a set of standards that are more prescriptive and being more oriented toward form. It still addresses use. There are certain uses that currently exist along the corridor that would no longer be allowed when the new zoning is implemented. If a certain use goes out “extinguished” they wouldn’t be allowed to be reestablished. An existing business will not be required to come into immediate conformance. An existing grandfathering provision will apply so those uses can continue as long as needed, or desired, by the property owner. The planned unit development in that area that was recently approved on N El Paso is actually designed around this particular zoning and the plan that was developed. Having these regulations in place is necessary to ensure that private development and private investments occur in an appropriate manner. We know Arkansas Tech University has intentions to invest in that corridor and they have agreed to abide by these regulations. We want to make sure there is a consistent standard controlling development in that area. A public hearing will be set for the October 2017 Planning Commission meeting. The Seventh Order of Business Planner Walden said we have a few issues that I believe we need to consider, but I need to know if you want to act on them: 1) Parking surfaces and parking requirements. 2) Amending the Special Use Permit process to eliminate the requirement for City Council review and approval. 3) Alter the non-conforming provisions. 4) Permanent installation of a food truck court(s). Mr. Walden also proposed a two-hour training session for a Saturday in the near future. All the commissioners were in favor of acting on each item. Meeting adjourned. ___________________________________________ Chairman Dennis Boyd 6