Planning Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 30, 2021 @ 5:30 p.m. The Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday November 30, 2021 at 5:30 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. Commissioners Present Chairman Wendell Miller Secretary Justin Cothren Vice-Chairman Jacimore Luke Duffield Larry Smith Cheryl Monfee John Choate Commissioners Absent Shirley Hatley Cody Black Justin Keller (City Council Liaison) Visitors Present: City Attorney Trey Smith, City Planner Sara Jondahl, Planner I Victoria Marchant, Flood Manager Ben Gray, Engineering Technician Armando Diaz, Airport Director Keith Frazier, Jim Lynch with City Corporation, Zayne Bryson with City Corporation, Alan Andrews, TJ Curtis, Donna Andrews, and David Garza with Barrett & Associates. Welcome Visitors The First Order of Business is a request to review and approve the minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting November 4, 2021. Commissioner Jacimore made the motion to approve the minutes as written. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Choate and passed unanimously. The Second Order of Business is a Large Scale Development located at 1759 Airport Road. Submitted by the City of Russellville. (LSDV-1121-000151) City Planner Jondahl stated that this application was a Large Scale Development for Russellville Regional Airport for a new “Nested T” hangar. She stated that the existing conditions for the Airport were that it had been in this location since the 1960’s, it was zoned M-1 – Light Industrial and was located within the Airport Industrial District. City Planner Jondahl said that the Russellville Regional Airport includes: 1 main terminal building; 21 buildings for the hangars, and multiple outbuildings to support airport operations. She stated that the staff review comments were that Aviation Services were permitted in the Light Industrial zone, and setback requirements were met for the property. The building was not visible from the ROW therefore did not need to comply with Commercial Building Design. Sidewalks were not required at this location, and there was sufficient Parking for the Airport. It was staff’s recommendation to approve the Large Scale Development to allow construction of a nested T Hanger at the Russellville Regional Airport as a result of the findings below: 1. The applicant demonstrates compliance with the regulations within Article 2.13 of the Russellville Zoning Code; and 2. The applicant demonstrates compliance with the regulations within section 7 of the Land Subdivision Development Code. Airport Director Keith Frazier stated that they were looking forward to beginning construction. He stated that this would be the review process for any development at the Airport from then on so that way everyone would be in the loop. Commissioner Choate made the motion to approve the item as presented by staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Duffield and passed unanimously. The Third Order of Business is discussion of a Large Scale Development located at 3600 Block of East 6th Street. Submitted by Barrett & Associates on behalf of Arkansas Valley Alliance for Economic Development Inc. (LSDV-1121-000152) City Planner Jondahl stated that this discussion was about the Bitcoin Mining that was discussed at the previous Planning Commission meeting. She stated that the City Council had not approved the Special Use Permit for this facility so the Planning Commission could not move forward with the Large Scale Development application at that time and that was why it was a discussion item only. City Planner Jondahl stated that the existing conditions were that this was an undeveloped vacant parcel, ten acres in size, which was adjacent to the Entergy Substation. This property was directly south of a residential subdivision. The property was zoned M-1 along with surrounding properties with the exception of the subdivision to the north, which was zoned R-2. David Garza with Barrett & Associates stated that even though the application was not being heard that evening he wanted to discuss it so that the Planning Commission could get information ahead of time as the applicant was still working with the City Council to move forward. He stated that they were proposing to move the units to the back of the property further away from the right-of-way and additionally the developer was willing to put the units into a building as a response to the noise concerns. Mr. Garza stated that they were hoping this would help mitigate the noise. He stated that the previous iteration of the site plan had thirteen units outside with fans on each side. Chairman Miller asked Mr. Garza what his discussions with the City Council had been regarding this application. Mr. Garza stated that the discussion was regarding if the units were going to be out in the open and not in an enclosure then the City Council wanted a sound analysis. Mr. Garza said that when he talked with the developer about it, he said it was going to be difficult to do that type of sound analysis and even if it was completed that did not ensure that it would work or be accurate. He also stated that after the analysis was completed the City would then come in and hire someone to do an analysis. Mr. Garza stated that this type of business was new and they could not find another one located within the state. He stated that he had convinced the applicant to put the Bitcoin mining structures in a building and work with an architect to soundproof the walls to help mitigate the potential issues and unknowns. Mr. Garza said that the building would still have fans and they would be larger to get the heat out but the fans would blow to the west toward the Tyson facility. He stated that in a larger building (40’x100’) the heat would have more area to congregate in as opposed to the originally proposed 10’x40’ buildings. Additionally with the larger structure they would be able to pull more air through and use quieter fans. Mr. Garza said that at the end of the building they could also add louvers that pointed down to help dampen the noise. Chairman Miller stated that he was sure they were not reinventing the wheel and certainly someone had done this somewhere. Mr. Garza stated that they did not know where. Mr. Garza stated that when he spoke to the manufacturers of the units they stated that they had a baffle that could come on the fans to direct the noise down. He stated that he had been in chicken houses that had the large fans and that the fans would pull a lot of air but they were not too loud. He stated that the proposed location for the buildings was going to be just south of the existing electric transformer station. Mr. Garza stated that they were taking the buildings as far south as they could on the property. He stated there were still some tweaks that were being made to the site such as the holly trees for screening. Mr. Garza stated that they wanted to bring the application as a discussion item so that the Commissioners could get a little bit of insight before the application came back before them the following month if the Special Use Permit got through City Council. Vice-Chairman Jacimore asked how large of a building would be needed to house all of the units. Mr. Garza stated that it would be a 40’x100’. He stated that the units were 10’x40 and they were able to put four of them in each building. Mr. Garza stated that they did not want to put any more than four in one structure due to the heat the units would generate. Commissioner Smith asked if the applicant was reducing down from 13 units to 4. Mr. Garza stated that they were going from 13 to 12 as four units would fit in each building and they were proposing 3 buildings. He stated that they reduced it from 13 single units outside to 12 units all of which would be inside a larger building. Mr. Garza stated that he thought it would help visually as well to just have the three larger buildings instead of all of the smaller units and he felt as though it would fit in visually with the manufacturing that was surrounding. Mr. Garza stated that the applicant was looking at doing foam insulation with a board and carpet on the inside of the buildings. Chairman Miller asked if the commission needed to take any on this item. City Planner Jondahl stated that no action was needed as it was just a discussion item and the Large Scale Development would hopefully be on the following months agenda. The Fourth Order of Business is a Vacation of a portion of E “H” Street Right-of-Way along lots 1 and 2 of Block 101 and a portion of N Cleveland Right-of-Way along lot 1 and 12 of Block 101 of the JL Shinn Addition. Submitted by Valley Christian School on behalf of Russellville First Assembly of God. (VAC-1121-000154) City Planner Jondahl stated that this application was a vacation of right-of-way for Valley Christian School/First Assembly of God. She stated that this application was as a result of the Variance application that the Board of Adjustment approved in October with the condition that the applicant apply for and obtain a vacation of right-of-way. City Planner Jondahl stated that the Board of Adjustment approved a reduction in the setback along East H Street from 20’ to 12’ and along N Cleveland from 15’ to 1’. She stated that by going through the vacation process the applicant would then meet the setback requirements for the district. City Planner Jondahl said the existing conditions were that the property was zoned R-3 – High Density Residential and was located in the Parker Neighborhood. She stated that the current use was a church/parochial school and the variance had been granted to allow the placement of a third mobile school classroom with the condition that they apply for the vacation of right-of-way. City Planner Jondahl said the existing right-of-way on both East H Street and Cleveland Avenue was 80 feet. She stated that only 60’ of right-of-way is required for a local street. City Planner Jondahl stated that the review comments were that the vacation of right-of-way did not impact circulation, access, utilities or open space as the right-of-way is reduced from 80’ to 66’ on N Cleveland and from 80’ to 72’ East H Street. She said that the right-of-way will remain open as it was being reduced. Additionally the vacation ensured that the development would meet the setback requirements and the City benefits by reducing the right-of-way width allowing funds to be directed to projects that would make an impact within the City for the citizens of Russellville. Staff recommended the application be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation for approval to vacate 14 feet of ROW on N Cleveland and 8 feet of ROW on East H Street as a result of the findings below: 1. There is not an impact to the Public Trust, Land Use Impacts, and no adverse effects to the Public Benefit; and 2. No Objections filed by any utility company; 3. No current installations within the easement prohibiting the vacation of the unopened portion of the ROW. Commissioner Smith made the motion to approve the item as presented by staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jacimore and passed unanimously. The Fifth Order of Business is a Zone text amendment to update the El Paso University District Table of Permitted Uses, specifically for the Downtown Crossing Zone in the Russellville Zoning Code. Submitted by Donna Andrews. (ZONE-1121-000153) City Planner Jondahl stated that the application was a request to update the Table of Permitted Uses within the Downtown Crossing Zone. City Planner Jondahl said she wanted to refresh the Commissioners memory on what the goals and purpose of the El Paso Zone were. She stated that it was created in March 2018 and it was built on the Russellville Downtown Master Plan. It centered on development potential opportunities within the District and it was aligned with the community, university, and business owner desires regarding economic development. She stated that it focused on connecting Downtown Russellville to Arkansas Tech University and included a vision that promoted a variety of housing and entertainment options to support downtown businesses. City Planner Jondahl stated that the El Paso Zone had what were referred to as build to lines which promoted walkability within the district. Businesses and residences were intended to be within a certain distance from the right-of-way. She stated that the zone put an emphasis on on-street parking, sidewalks, and street trees to facilitate walkability and livability within the district. City Planner Jondahl stated that the El Paso Zone created their own table of permitted uses for the district to further outline what uses were and were not allowed within the district. She stated that auto related uses including any drive thru facility, auto electronics sales or service, and auto-oriented service, repair were defined as Not Permitted within this district. City Planner Jondahl then showed an image of what was included in the plan which showed infill mixed-use, a gateway to El Paso Avenue, greenway areas, and renovated housing. She stated that the vision included the types of development that the Commissioners may have been familiar with in the Hendrix Village area in Conway which had retail and restaurant uses on the first floors and then top floor living areas. City Planner Jondahl said there was one development that was looking to come into the El Paso district where the first floor would meet the criteria of the El Paso District. It would have retail/restaurant uses on the first floor and second and third story apartment style living. She stated that she also wanted to bring to the Commissioners attention that in July 2021, the City Council hired the consultant firm “Garver” to help the City of Russellville update the entire Russellville Zoning Code. On September 23, 2021 a Public Input Meeting was held to determine what areas of focus needed to be included in the Zoning Code Updates. The El Paso Zone was identified as an area that we need to review for consideration as part of the overall Zoning Code Update Process. Staff recommended forwarding this application to the City Council with a recommendation of denial regarding Article 2.18.3 Schedule of Uses for the El Paso / University District as a result of the findings: 1. The El Paso / University District was created on March 15, 2018; and 2. This zone was created to facilitate walkability and livability as a connector between the ATU campus and downtown with food, activities, events, and residences; and 3. This zone is meant to maintain the small town ambience and natural heritage; and 4. This application does not meet the vision and intent of the El Paso / University District in the long term; and 5. Auto related uses are specifically called out within this zone as not permitted; and 6. The change is not consistent with the objectives outlined in the zoning code. Donna Andrews stated that she owned the garage building at 407 N El Paso which had been in her family 45-50 years and had been used for nothing except an auto repair shop and River Valley Food 4 Kids which had occupied it for the last few years. She stated that, knowing when she rented it to River Valley Food 4 Kids that they only wanted it for 1-4 years, she continued to maintain a business license from the City annually. Ms. Andrews stated that since the City issued the license from year to year she was under the impression that she was good to go when River Valley Food 4 Kids left she would still be able to do auto repair. She stated that Jonathan with Jonathan’s repair contacted her recently knowing that her building was going to be vacant and asked her if she would be willing to let him occupy it for auto detailing. Ms. Andrews stated that she approached City Planner Jondahl and she was then informed about the rezoning that took place in 2018. Ms. Andrews said she was not advised about this rezoning and did not know anything had happened. She stated that she was a widow and had a disabled son and she really did need the income. Ms. Andrews stated that she would hate for the building to become vacant and sit there and become an eyesore. She stated that she had maintained the property since her husband had passed away and she brought it up to code considerably. Ms. Andrews stated without income on the property she would not be able to continue to upkeep the property as she had been and she was afraid it would get back to more of an eyesore. She stated that Jonathan’s detailing currently had been detailing for the Ford and Chevrolet dealerships and his building had sold and he was looking for a new location. Commissioner Smith asked if there was any notification that went out to the property owners when the Rezoning occurred in 2018. City Planner Jondahl stated that there were notifications that went out in the Courier newspaper of meetings going on as well as notifications of zone changes at Planning Commission and City Council. She stated that she could not confirm from the file if all of the property owners within the district had been notified and she was not on staff at the time so the file was all she had to reference. Commissioner Duffield asked what the procedure was for notification of property owners, if it was just through publication in the newspaper or if it was procedure to directly notify the individuals who were directly affected by the Rezoning. City Planner Jondahl stated that when the City of Russellville did a Zone Text Amendment the procedure was to advertise in the Courier newspaper. She stated that she did not believe that there was a requirement to notify property owners unless it was specific to a property, so the newspaper would be the sufficient notification. Chairman Miller asked if notifying the individual property owners via Certified Mail was something that the City should consider moving forward as not everyone reads the newspaper. City Planner Jondahl stated that as part of the zoning code updates that were underway, different ways to do notification could be something that was considered during that process. She stated that she did agree that not many people read the newspaper anymore and there should be other options, however, the State law required notification in the newspaper and that was the only notification that the State law required. Commissioner Monfee stated that the El Paso area had undergone a large amount of development since this started in 2018, including all the work on El Paso Avenue. She stated that all of it was very well publicized back in 2018 to promote Arkansas Tech University’s coordination with the City and the development. City Planner Jondahl stated that she did know that there were public meetings held on El Paso with Arkansas Tech University leading the charge, she just did not have anything noting if there was notice given to specific owners. Commissioner Smith asked if the public meeting was notified and advertised through the newspaper. City Planner Jondahl confirmed that it was. Commissioner Duffield asked if on an individual parcel, the landowners adjacent to the property had to be notified via certified mail that there was a request for a zone change. City Planner Jondahl confirmed that when it was related to a specific parcel and they were changing the map designation they had to notify the adjacent landowners. She stated that Zone Text Amendments were different in that they affect everything within a certain zone. Commissioner Smith stated that there was a public hearing on the zone in 2018. City Planner Jondahl confirmed there was and it was heard before the Planning Commission and City Council. Alan Andrews stated that he owned a property on the corner of El Paso and Parkway. He stated that what he thought City Planner Jondahl said was that unless it was a significant amount of land the City did not normally notify the individuals specifically that own the land. He stated that he and Ms. Andrews owned quite a bit of property in the El Paso University Zone and heard nothing about it. Mr. Andrews stated that if he would have known what was happening he would have disagreed with it. He stated that with the update to the El Paso University district, it stated there had to be on-street parking and street trees. Mr. Andrews stated that he asked City Planner Jondahl how he would do that in the concrete at his property and she said he could figure out how to do it. He stated that he did not think that was proper and that he was going to pursue it but in the interim Ms. Andrews had a tenant ready to rent her building and she needed to rent it. He stated that the fantasy with Arkansas Tech University and Downtown Russellville that students could meander down from Tech to goof off in downtown, there was nothing to do in downtown anyways. Mr. Andrews stated that he noticed that Dog Ear Books went out of business and that it was a large reconstruction project for the building it occupied and they finally gave it up. He stated that the Commission could do whatever they wanted with the idea about Arkansas Tech University and walkability but it impacts he and Ms. Andrews directly and he was going to pursue it in other ways. Mr. Andrews stated that Ms. Andrews should be able to rent her property as she spent a bunch of money to have the building repainted, rewired, and brought up to code. He stated that this was unfair. Commissioner Choate asked a question referencing a map from the staff presentation. Commissioner Choate asked if Mr. Andrews property on the corner was in the same district and if it was operated as a car lot. Mr. Andrews confirmed that it was in the same district and was operated as a car lot. Mr. Andrews stated that it had recently gone out of business due to health issues of the business owner. He stated that the property was up for rent at the time of the meeting and that his property was grandfathered in. He reiterated that he knew nothing about the Rezoning in 2018 and he found out recently due to some questions he had asked regarding the building on his property. He stated that the building on the property was not a rectangle and due to its odd shape and unusual roof configuration it leads to leaks. Mr. Andrews stated that he called the City to see about making changes to the building so that he could put a new roof on it. He said that at that point in time is when he found out about the zoning and how impactful it was. Mr. Andrews stated that there was a zero threshold that applied to the entire property and if you did anything to change the use, the property had to be brought into compliance with the new code including the on-street parking and street trees. He stated that he asked City Planner Jondahl how he was going to get access to his property with on-street parking and she indicated she was unsure how he would do that. Mr. Andrews stated that he would be pursuing getting he and Ms. Andrews properties excluded from the El Paso district because they could not conform to what the code had in mind. He stated that if they wanted walkability they could use the other side of El Paso, additionally he indicated that he did not believe they needed both sides of the street for students to go from campus to downtown. Mr. Andrews reiterated that he just happened to call and ask about his property and that he could have wandered off into a disaster had he not called. Vice-Chairman Jacimore asked City Planner Jondahl if the reason the Commission was hearing this application was because it was changing hands and changing uses. City Planner Jondahl stated that it was no longer considered non-conforming. She stated that when the use changed from an auto repair shop to River Valley Food 4 Kids, that discontinued the non-conforming use, because you could remain a non-conforming use as long as you are actively using the property for that use. City Planner Jondahl stated that in the case of Mr. Andrews property with the car lot it was a non-conforming use because it was actively still a carlot. She stated that in the case of Ms. Andrews property when the auto use ended and it transferred four years prior to River Valley Food 4 Kids that lost the non-conforming use so they could not go back to an auto repair shop or auto detail shop because that was not in conformance with the Zoning Code for the El Paso University District Table of Permitted Uses. Vice-Chairman Jacimore asked if the car lot on the corner owned by Mr. Andrews could still be a car lot. City Planner Jondahl confirmed that it could be at that time because it was still a car lot. Mr. Andrews stated that when people contacted him about the car lot property that he told people that it had to be a car lot. He stated that if he waited six months, he would no longer be able to use the property as a car lot. Mr. Andrews stated that Ms. Andrews was not properly notified or she would have told River Valley Food 4 Kids that she was sorry but it had to remain an auto repair garage or she would not be able to have that use there again. Mr. Andrews stated that it was similar to his car lot, if you looked at the building it looked just like a garage building because it was. He stated that Ms. Andrews, like he almost did, wandered off into this situation because she did not know. Ms. Andrews stated that the City did sell her a business license every year and she had them with her. Mr. Andrews stated that City Attorney Smith sent him an email regarding permits. He stated that he had pointed out to City Attorney Smith that Ms. Andrews had received a business license for an auto repair garage which she had kept up. Mr. Andrews stated that from what he recalled, City Attorney Smith stated that they were two different issues and that a permit does not have anything to do with the use. Mr. Andrews stated that if it was improper for Ms. Andrews to be receiving her business license then what is a permit? He stated that the license was valid at the time of the meeting. City Planner Jondahl stated regarding the business license, when it had been applied for in January of 2021 and staff was doing the review it was noted that the location was where River Valley Food 4 Kids was located. At that point staff tried to contact the applicant but the information on file did not lead staff back to Ms. Andrews; it was an auto repair garage number that was no longer in service. City Planner Jondahl stated that the license was not issued for 2021 and when it was brought to staff's attention that it was Ms. Andrews, the City refunded all four years of the business license. She stated however, the issue at hand was whether or not to change the Table of Permitted Uses for the El Paso University District to allow auto detail. City Planner Jondahl stated that she could talk about business licenses but it was under a separate ordinance and it was a separate issue than the application. She stated that the application in question was whether or not to bring auto detail shops onto the Table of Permitted Uses for the Downtown Crossing Zone which would allow auto detail shops in any location within the Downtown  Crossing Zone. She stated that if the idea, goals, and vision of the El Paso District were what they wanted to see and if they wanted to see the redevelopment and economic development of this district, then staff’s recommendation would still be to deny the application. City Planner Jondahl stated that an auto related use was not included in the vision for the El Paso University District. Commissioner Cothren asked if they would be able to apply for the auto detail shop as a Special Use Permit. City Planner Jondahl stated that it was specifically not permitted within that zone so they would not be allowed to apply for a Special Use Permit. She stated that an applicant could not apply for a Special Use Permit unless a use was listed on the Table of Permitted Uses as permitted by Special Use Permit. Mr. Andrews said that City Planner Jondahl had stated that staff had trouble identifying who to inquire with regarding Ms. Andrews business license and that staff approached the people who were running the business instead of calling the courthouse and finding out who the property was. He stated that once again Ms. Andrews was not properly informed. Mr. Andrews stated that regarding messing up the vision for the zone, the City could cut he and Ms. Andrews out of their vision. He stated that the intent of the City was to drive the property owners to the point where they could not use their property so that they would ideally sell it to Arkansas Tech University so that they could have their vision. Mr. Andrews stated that he had another vision, he and Ms. Andrews both owned their respective properties and they were going to continue to own them. He stated that what he would like ideally would be to be cut out of the vision. Mr. Andrews stated that there was nowhere else that an auto related business could go in on El Paso. He stated that he believed Arkansas Tech University had bought all of the property along the east side of El Paso Avenue, then there was the creek, then the old police department, and there was nowhere else where an auto related business could go in. Chairman Miller stated that the authority that the Planning Commission had was to forward the application to the City Council for approval or denial and the City Council had the ultimate decision authority on the application. He stated that Mr. Andrews was referring to things that the Planning Commission did not have the authority to do. Chairman Miller stated that as far as the notification process it was something that needed to be looked into but that was not something that the Planning Commission was deciding on that evening. Mr. Andrews stated that he was not familiar with the Planning Commission’s process but he recommended that the Planning Commission forward it to the City Council and not deny it. Ms. Andrews asked if the application would go before the City Council the third Thursday of the month. City Planner Jondahl confirmed that it would. Commissioner Cothren made the motion to approve the item. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jacimore and passed by a vote of 5-1 with one abstaining. Meeting adjourned. _________________________ Chairman Wendell Miller