Loading...
10-23-03Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING City Hall — 500 W. Markham October 21, 2003 6:00 PM The Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas met in regular session with Mayor Dailey Presiding. Assistant City Clerk, Nataki Blocker called the roll with the following Directors Present: Pugh, Vice Mayor Hinton, Keck, Adcock, Stewart, Hurst, Wyrick, Cazort, and Mayor Dailey. The following directors were not present at roll call, but enrolled between 6:05 PM and 6:15 PM: Director Kumpuris at 6:05, Director Stewart at 6:08 PM and Director Keck at 6:15 P. Director Adcock gave the invocation, which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENTATIONS: Boo at the Zoo — Mike Blakely Change Your Clock, Change Your Battery — Little Rock Fire Department — Chief Kinney Capital Bond Project Overview - Robinson Center and Statehouse Improvements, Animal Safety, School Safety, Parks and Zoo Several Presentations were made by City of Little Rock staff regarding issues on the November 4, 2003 Special Bond Election for the City of Little Rock: Mr. Tony Bozynski presented an overview of Question 8, Animal Services and Animal Safety. Mr. Guy Lowes Presented an overview of Question 7, School Safety and Sidewalk Issues Mr. Bryan Day/ Mike Blakely presented an overview of Question 6, Parks and Zoo Improvement, Expansion and Maintenance. Director Keck made the announcement that early voting has started, available from 8AM to 6PM at the County Court House, Delta Trust and Bank on Hwy 10, Southwest Community Center, and the Dunbar Community Center. Mayor Dailey introduced Boy Scout Troop 7 of Little Rock. Mayor Dailey announced where early voting locations were for the November 4t" Bond Election. Mayor Dailey asked to add Items 19, and 20 (public hearings) to the list of GROUPED ITEMS if there was no one to speak in favor or opposition to the proposals. There was no objection from the Board members present. Mayor Dailey asked the Board to move Item 23, which would be on the agenda for second reading at tonight's meeting, and discussion has already taken place on the item, to be heard after the GROUPED ITEMS, CONSENT AGENDA (1 -5) 1. MOTION - To approve Minutes of Regular Board of Directors Meetings: August 19, 2003 and September 2, 2003. 2. MOTION - To set the date of public hearing for November 4, 2003 on an appeal of the decision of the City Beautiful Commission to deny a variance request for property located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 11,617 - To appoint Charles W. Letzig and Gary Green to vacant positions on the Riverdale Levee Improvement District No. 134. Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 4. RESOLUTION NO. 11,618 - Of the Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas in support of the Heights Neighborhood Action Plan. Various citizens representing the neighborhood, outlined the highlights of the Heights Neighborhood Action Plan for 2003. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 11,619 - To authorize the City Manager to apply for a Healthy Living Grant to construct a portion of Arkansas River Trail; and for other purposes. The Consent Agenda was read. Director Adcock made a motion, seconded by Director Cazort to adopt the Consent Agenda. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the Consent Agenda was adopted. The next consideration was the Grouped Items consisting of Items 6 -17, 19 -20. Item 18 was held separately for discussion purposes. Mayor Dailey announced that one card to speak in opposition to Item 9 had been turned in. He asked Ms. Anita Spence to make her presentation, and if after the presentation, the Board wished, they could hold the item separate. 6. ORDINANCE NO. 18,960 - To amend the Master Street Plan (15,519) to extend Little Fourche Class I Bike Route from the South Loop Adjacent, south and west to County Line. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, I absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: To extend the Class I Little Fourche Bike Route from the South Loop alignment to the County Line along the former Rock Island RR as part of a regional Rails to Trails effort. 7. ORDINANCE NO. 18,961 - To repeal Chapter 36, Article V, Division 8, Section 36- 350, through Section 36 -367, known as Design Guidelines; to adopt new language for Chapter 36, Article V, Division 8, Section 36 -350, through Section 36 -367. To be known as the River Market Design Guidelines and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: A Revision of the River Market Design Overlay District. 8. ORDINANCE NO. 18,962 - Z -7475 — To reclassify property located at 2719 North University from C -3 to R -2, in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock, and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Staff is requesting the developed single- family residential unit located at 2719 N. University be reclassified from C -3 to R -2. 9. ORDINANCE NO. 18,963 - Z- 6120 -H — Approving a Revised Planned Zoning Development and establishing a Revised Planned Residential District titled Capital Hills Apartments Revised Long -Form PRD located on Capitol Hills Boulevard west of Rushmore Avenue, in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The applicant proposes to revise a previously approved Planned Development to allow for the placement of two trash compactors on the site. 10. Ms. Anita Spence spoke in opposition to Item 9, saying she was representing the Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association. She said she was not opposing the dumpsters, but there was two parts to the proposed development. Ms. Spence stated the part she was speaking in opposition to was basically the replanting of the buffer zone that was destroyed. She said there are a lot of pine trees on the border of the buffer and no hardwoods to replace everything that was taken down. She stated she wanted to express their frustration with the development saying that the neighborhood was not kept abreast of all the information regarding the development. Director Adcock asked if there was not a requirement in the landscape ordinance that could dictate what kind of trees could be planted in buffer zones. Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the applicant is putting back two times as many trees as required by the ordinance because they were not supposed to have torn them down, but as to type of tree, there is not a requirement. Mr. Lawson stated that the reason for this particular tree is that they are a fast growing and wide tree, and if hardwoods were put in, they take a number of 2 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 years to develop. Mayor Dailey asked if the Board wished to leave the item grouped, or to handle it as a separate item. The Board wished to leave it as one of the grouped items. 10. ORDINANCE NO. 18,964 - LU- 03 -12 -01 - To amend the Land Use Plan (16,222) in the 65th Street West Planning District from Office to Commercial and Park/Open - Space; and for other purposes. Planning Commission 10 yes, 0 no, I absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Land Use Plan Amendment in the 65`h Street West Planning District from Office to Commercial and Park/Open Space for future commercial development. 11. ORDINANCE NO. 18,965 - Z- 3371 -G — Reclassifying property located south of Colonel Glenn Road and west of I -430 from 0-2 (with conditions) to C -3 and OS (with conditions) in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, I absent. Staff recommends approval (with conditions). Synopsis: The owner of the 40 acre tract located south of Colonel Glen Road and west of I -430 (south of the intersection of Colonel Glenn Plaza Drive and Bowman Plaza Drive) is requesting that the zoning be reclassified from 0-2 (with conditions) to C -3 and OS (with conditions). 12. ORDINANCE NO. 18,966 - Z- 3371 -H — Reclassifying property located along the west side of I -430, south of Colonel Glenn Road, from R -2 to C -3 and OS (with conditions). Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staffrecommends approval (with conditions). Synopsis: The owners of the 13 acre tract located along the west side of Interstate 430, approximately 2,000 feet south of Colonel Glenn Road, are requesting that the zoning be re classified from R -2 to C -3 and OS (with conditions). The applicants originally requested a rezoning to C -4, but amended the application prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing. 13. ORDINANCE NO. 18,967 - Z- 6957 -A — Reclassifying property located at the southeast corner of Colonel Glenn Road and I -430 from C -3 to C -4, Little Rock, Arkansas, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, I absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The owner of the 13 acre tract located at the southeast corner of Colonel Glenn Road and Interstate 430 is requesting that the zoning be reclassified from C -3 to C -4. 14. ORDINANCE NO. 18,968 - Z -7478 — Reclassifying property located in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas at 15900 Arkansas Systems Drive from 0-2 to 0-3 (with conditions) amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval (with conditions). Synopsis: The owner of the 16.34 acre tract located at 15900 Arkansas Systems Drive (northwest corner of Arkansas Systems Drive and Kirk Drive) is requesting that the zoning be reclassified from 0-2 to C -3 (with conditions). 15. ORDINANCE NO. 18,969 - LU- 03 -09 -03 — To amend the Land Use Plan (16222) in the I -630 Planning District from Multi- Family to Commercial; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, I absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Land Use Plan amendments in the I -630 Planning District from Multi- Family to Commercial for future development. 16. ORDINANCE NO. 18,970 - Z -7481— Reclassifying property located along the east side of Mary Street between Lucie Avenue and Brack Street, Little Rock, Arkansas, from R -3 and R -5 to C -4. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 0 no, 1 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The owner of the 0.96 acre property along the east side of Mary St, between Lucie Ave and Brack St is requesting that the zoning be reclassified from R -3 and R -5 to C -4. 17. ORDINANCE NO. 18,971 - To amend Little Rock, Arkansas Ordinance No. 18,798 (December 17, 2002) to adjust the Fiscal Year 2003 Budget Ordinance to note 2002 encumbrance rollovers transfers between funds, and other adjustments; to declare an emergency; and for other purposes. Synopsis: Five specific FY03 budget changes need to be made to adjust for known changes in the FY03 budget. Adjustments: LR NOW Elections costs, CATA Sunday Service, Return of Grant Match Funds to the General Fund, Budget Reductions of 08- 20 -03, Budget Reductions of 09- 25 -03. 19. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE NO. 18,973 - To abandon easements remaining in the former Spruce Street right -of -way located between Lee Avenue and Woodlawn Avenue, adjacent to Blocks 24 and 25, Pulaski Heights Addition. Planning Commission: 9 yes, 0 no, 2 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Pulaski Heights United Methodist is requesting abandonment of the easements retained within the former Spruce Street right -of- way located between Lee and Woodlawn Avenues. Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21.2003 20. PUBLIC HEARING &ORDINANCE NO. 18,974 - To revoke Planning Zoning Districts titled Red River Marine Short Form PDC (Z-4973 -A) and Ibsen Imports located at 3021 Cantrell Road, amended Short Form PCD (Z- 4973 -B) located at 3021 Cantrell Road; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 10 yes, 1 no, 0 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The owner of the property located at 3021 Cantrell Road is requesting that the PCD zoning be revoked and the previous zoning of "C -3" General Commercial be restored. The Grouped items consisting of Items 6 -17, 19 & 20, was read the first time. The rules were suspended to provide for the second and third readings of the ordinances by unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two thirds in number. The ordinances were read the second and third times and by unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two thirds in number, the ordinances (Items 6 -17,19 & 20) passed. 18. ORDINANCE NO. 18,972 - Condemning certain structures in the City of Little Rock as structural, fire, and health hazards; providing for summary abatement procedures; directing the City Attorney to take such action as is necessary to raze and remove said structures; declaring an emergency; and for other purposes. There was lengthy discussion regarding the condemnation ordinance. Director Pugh asked for staff to give a brief presentation. Mayor Dailey recognized Ms. Janetta Kearney, who spoke in opposition to the condemnation of the home at 2123 Spring Street. Ms. Kearney stated this property was condemned from 1987, yet she stated she had bought at least three permits herself and had been granted $92,000 in TNEP funds to restore the property and has been unable to get permits to restore the property. She stated she believed she had spoken to each board member in terms of what she wanted to do in terms of living in the property. She stated she had copies of the permits she had requested, and copies of multiple lawsuits where she has tried to get permits. She said she had received letters where the City Attorney keeps saying that it is hazardous to work on. She said her question was "what is going on "? " If the City Attorney made the decision that it is too hazardous to work on, why is she paying for permits "? " If she was paying for permits, and the court said, including the Arkansas Supreme Court, that they will allow her to work on it, then at what point, and whose decision is she to listen to "? Ms. Kearney stated she has documentation, an eight hundred plus page report that she has that she purchased from CDBG. Ms. Kearney stated that she is profusely opposed to doing anything with this property other than the City's assistance in getting her into the property as a residence. Director Stewart made a motion to hold this separately and deal with it later in the meeting. Director Keck asked if the other property (on Arch Street) listed in this ordinance would be kept with the grouped items. Mr. Carpenter stated there is one ordinance that has both properties listed, and two ordinances would be created if dealt with separately. Mayor Dailey stated what he was suggesting was to hold this item separately to deal with it as a separate item rather than as one of the grouped items. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, Item 18 was held separate from the Grouped Items. Mr. Tony Bozynski, Director of Housing and Neighborhood Programs, presented a presentation that gave a history of the property. He stated both properties fall within the jurisdiction of the Capitol Zoning District. After action by the Little Rock Board of Directors, approving the ordinance to condemn these two structures, before the demolition can take place, approval by the Capitol Zoning Commission will also be necessary to grant the demolition permit. He stated City staff is scheduled to go before the Capitol Zoning Commission on October 30th with a request for the demolition permits on both structures, assuming the Little Rock Board of Directors pass the ordinance before the Board tonight. Mr. Bozynski stated it is staff's position that both properties have not been maintained for several years, are in disrepair, and have deteriorated to a point that they are unsafe and are creating a hazard for nearby properties and nuisances for surrounding neighborhoods. He said staff feels they do need to be demolished. He summarized the case file for 2123 Spring Street. He stated this property has a long history going back to 1987 with the previous owner. He stated the current owner, Ms. Janetta Kearney took possession in 1994, the first building permit was obtained in 1994, a stop work order issued in 1995, the structure was declared unsafe in 1995, the first citation was issued in 1995. He stated this has been the pattern through out the history of this property. He stated that permits would be obtained, they would expire, stop work El Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 orders, then citations would be issued and that has gone on for approximately ten years. He stated they have attempted to work with Ms. Kearney. He stated when he started as Interim Director of Housing and Neighborhood Programs; he got involved with the project. Several staff members represented Ms. Kearney in front of Capitol Design and Zoning Review Committee, because her plans were to build a garage on the property and make some additions to the rear of the property, extending or expanding the kitchen. He stated that would require Capitol Zoning approval. Mr. Bozynski stated the file on this property included a statement from the Fire Marshall's Office stating this property presents a problem and is a hazard for the neighborhood. Director Wyrick asked if any progress has been made on the house since 1998 as far as repairs. Mr. Bozynski stated there have been some repairs on the interior, but not on the exterior. Director Stewart asked about the $92,000 that had been secured for rehabilitation of this property. Mr. Bozynski stated the total project cost is $90,000 and Ms. Kearney has been approved for $18,000 in TNEP funds and $45,000 in CDBG funds, but those are still on hold. He said it was his understanding that the CDBG funds, because they have to update income information every six months, there is a question of whether the current information is up to date, and that additional information may have to be obtained. Mr. Bozynski showed pictures from different angles of the property at 2123 Spring Street, showing areas of damage and deterioration. Mr. Bozynski also presented a history of 1708 Arch Street, saying the original inspection occurred in 1987, there was no record that the structure had ever been repaired, the property was declared unsafe on August 7, 2003, Code Enforcement and the Fire Marshall's Office declared the property unsafe by exterior examination. He stated staff has never been able to gain entry into the interior of this property, and have used all available means since 2000. The owner obtained a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Capital Zoning District to undertake some repair work and a building permit from the City of Little Rock was issued for approximately $5,000 in repairs, which in staff's opinion does not come close to addressing the state of disrepair this house is in. He stated there is no evidence that repairs have started. The owner was given 30 days to begin repairs; the permit expired on September 7, 2003. The structure is close to the neighbor and that fire could jeopardize the adjacent property. Photographs of the property were shown indicating some of the damage and deterioration of the property. Vice Mayor Hinton asked if there were any pending lawsuits on either of the properties involved in this ordinance. Mr. Bozynski stated he was unaware of any at this time. Mr. Tom Carpenter, City Attorney, indicated that he did not know of any lawsuit that had been filed. Director Adcock asked Mr. Carpenter if he could brief the Board on what lawsuits have been filed regarding the property on Spring Street. Mr. Carpenter stated he was only aware of one particular lawsuit that the City had won, but knew there have been enforcement actions, but again only knew of one lawsuit in 1995 or 1996 that the city was made a party to, and were successful in winning the suit in Federal Court. Mr. Bruce Moore, City Manager, stated that the past Friday, Ms. Kearney had come to City Hall to serve something, and that Mr. Bill Mann, Deputy City Attorney had visited with her, and nothing was presented to the city at that time, but Ms. Kearney may refer to this visit in her rebuttal. Ms. Kearney stated she received the first permit in 1994, and started to work on the property the following month. She stated she got the first stop work order two days after work had begun. The stop orders did not stop at all until 1998 when the city refused to give her stop orders. She stated she has consistent data in writing where she has been requesting stop orders. She stated that it has been a matter of the City, refusing to allow her to work on the property. She stated the windows that are out were blown out by the storm in 1999, and that she had consistently been requesting permits to restore the windows, and the property and requesting to live in the property. Ms. Kearney stated that in December of 1999, she filed with the City Court, which Mr. Carpenter, City Attorney, responded to one year later. She said she had asked in December 1999 for a permit. She stated she filed the permit along with part of the documentation she filed with a lawsuit in the City court asking for an injunction against the City to do anything on her property, and for damages done to her over a ten -year period. She stated that suit requested a permit that allow her to work on the property and live on the property because she had no place to live, and asked as an alternative to living on the property to give her a demolition permit. She stated this went to the Supreme Court, and did not know how Mr. Carpenter could say the City won because it went to the Supreme Court twice. She stated that Judge Humphries ruled in her favor, which the City refused to honor, and then was 5 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court. The Arkansas Supreme Court came back in her favor. She stated that Mr. Carpenter refused to honor the Arkansas Supreme Court's decision, and in fact, kept saying the property was hazardous to work on. She said the case was remanded back to Judge Humphries in August of 1998. Director Stewart asked Ms. Kearney if her property taxes were paid on the property. Ms. Kearney stated she paid the taxes last year, for several years back. Director Kumpuris stated he was a little confused, and asked Mr. Moore, City Manager to help clarify. Mr. Moore stated this has been an ongoing dialog, and sometimes partnership, regarding the restoration of Ms. Kearney's house. He stated it has been ongoing for a significant number of years. The main issue is that because no redevelopment has occurred, the house has deteriorated to a point where, he had asked city staff, as a result of the last meeting he had with Ms. Kearney, and representatives from Capitol Zoning, where demolition had come up, to go with Ms Kearney and do an assessment of the property. City staff had not been inside the property in over two and a half years. He stated he asked the Housing staff and Ms. Kearney, along with the Capitol Zoning Staff, and a City fire marshal, to go out and assess the property (Spring Street property). He stated that because staff had not been in the property in a significant period of time, the deterioration was significant. Mr. Moore stated it was at the last meeting that the concept of demolition was discussed. He stated he left that meeting with the understanding that if City staff made an assessment, that the house was in the condition of not being able to be rehabilitated, and that Ms. Kearney agreed with that. He stated he did receive a subsequent e-mail from Ms. Kearney saying that was not the case, that she had been working on this for a significant period of time, and wished to continue to have time to rehab the property. Mr. Moore stated that a testament to the City's partnership with Ms. Kearney is the fact that staff has worked closely with her to identify the CDBG Funds, the TNEP Funds, which this board passed a resolution a few years ago. Mr. Moore stated one of the most critical parts of this issue is Capitol Zoning. He stated that Ms. Kearney does have to get approval from them. He said that City staff has over the years worked with Ms. Kearney, and clearly it was important to see that property rehabilitated, but because of the significant time period, and nothing has happened, the fire marshal and code officers made recommendations that the house was not in a condition to be rehabilitated. Mr. Bozynski stated that the situation before Capitol Zoning is that Ms. Kearney wants to construct a garage, and then make some additions to the exterior of the house, and that requires action by the Capitol Zoning Commission and that case has been before the Commission several months and it was his understanding that the last time Ms. Kearney was before that Commission to obtain approval for these projects that a request was made for her to submit more detailed architectural drawings for the exterior work, and as far as he knows, that has not taken place. (Mr. Bozynski clarified that he does sit on the Capitol Zoning Board as the City's representative, but that he has recused on this issue). Director Kumpuris asked if it was the City's position that this property was beyond repair. Mr. Bozynski stated yes. Director Kumpuris asked why plans for a garage, etc., is even talked about at this point, if the City's position is that the structure is not safe, and cannot be rehabilitated, and at this point is a danger to the community. Mr. Bozynski answered that those were plans of Ms. Kearney's, and were submitted over a year ago. Director Kumpuris asked Mr. Carpenter if there were any legal issues to consider. Mr. Carpenter indicated there were not. Vice Mayor Hinton asked if any of the funds spoken about tonight had recently been granted. Mr. Bozynski stated the funds have been approved for the property, and the approvals were probably at least a year and a half ago, on the TNEP funds, and was not sure about the CDBG funds, but the funds were not forwarded to Ms. Kearney. Mr. Moore clarified that at the last meeting, approximately thirty days ago, he reviewed a list of violations that Ms. Kearney had been presented from the City Code staff, which outlined the violations she needed to address in order to get permits. He stated he felt the house needed re- inspected, and Ms. Kearney agreed that the house needed inspected because the City's last inspection had been over two years ago. He stated it was at that point, that staff went out, and made the assessment of the house that it was beyond the state of repair. Mr. Moore stated that there has been no action in the past one to two years regarding additional funding. Director Adcock asked if Ms. Kearney has these grants available, could the funds be used, if this house was demolished to build a new home on the property. Mr. Moore stated on the TNEP Program the dollars were limited to 20% of the rehabilitation cost or 20% of new construction, so the TNEP money could be used for new construction of the property. He stated the CDBG Program would require current financial information from Ms. Kearney, to see if she was still eligible. Director Adcock 2 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 asked if that had been addressed with Ms. Kearney. Mr. Moore stated he was sure that the TNEP program option had been discussed with Ms. Kearney, but unsure as to whether the CDBG Fund had been discussed. Ms. Kearney stated she had not heard this discussion before. Director Adcock asked Ms. Kearney if this would be a possible solution. Ms. Kearney stated it would be if the house was going to be destroyed, but she still believed that the CDBG monies from he federal people were planning that the property could be rehabilitated. She stated the same fire marshal had made the same claim seven years ago, that the property should be razed because it was a fire hazard in 1995. Ms. Kearney stated she would use the money to build a new structure. Director Adcock asked staff to meet with Ms. Kearney if the Board votes for the condemnation of the structure. Mr. Bozynski reminded the Board with Capital Zoning Jurisdiction, that new construction would require their approval before a permit is issued. The ordinance was read the first time. The rules were suspended by two - thirds vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number to provide for the second and third readings of the ordinance. The ordinance was read the second and third times. A roll call vote was taken and recorded as follows: Directors Pugh, Hurst, Cazort, Keck, Stewart, Wyrick, Kumpuris, Graves, Adcock, Vice Mayor Hinton, and Mayor Dailey voted in favor. The ordinance and emergency clause was passed. Later in the meeting, Director Stewart asked to rescind her yes vote, and vote no on the condemnation ordinance. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter to outline the proper procedure for this. Mr. Carpenter stated since the vote was 11 positive votes; the Clerk could make that correction in the voting record. The Clerk announced that with the change in vote, the record would reflect that there were 10 yes votes and I no. (Director Stewart voting no). The Board recessed at 8:00 PM for a Board break. The meeting reconvened at 8:20 PM. Mayor Dailey called the meeting back in to session. 21. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE NO. To appeal the Planning Commission's decision to deny the establishment of a Planned Zoning District titled Elliott Short -Form PD -O located at 1313 South Tyler Street. Planning Commission: 4 yes, 5 no, 2 absent. Staff recommends denial. Ordinance Failed. Synopsis: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R -2 to PD-0 to allow the conversion of an existing single - family home into an office use. Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, overviewed the application. Mr. Lawson stated staff objects to the fact that this is a residential piece of property and is in a residential neighborhood and the people in the community want the property left as a house not as an office use. Issues discussed were the type of business, parking, permits necessary, number of employees, hours of operation. The applicants, Mr. Marcus, Ms. Ramona Elliott, and Ms. Sharon Moore, stated they wanted to use the home as an administrative office for three things and that they would not have more than three employees accessing the office at one time. Mr. Markus said they wanted to use this home to house files, for billing, and paperwork; administrative needs. The home would retain its original character; no modifications at all on the outside or inside, no signs would be put up. They stated there would be no therapy evaluations or therapist on site. Their hours of operation would be 7 AM to 6 PM. There would be no patients, or clients coming to the office. Citizens speaking in opposition were Janelle Romandia, Joe White, Deborah White, William Shepherd, Richard Yeatter, Ruth Bell, Dorothy McCuen, citing reasons such as the Neighborhood Action Plan that called for single - family dwellings, that the applicants have actually been in operation for three months, that there are two or three cars parked there at the location at all times, ten or more people have come and gone from this address in a span of one and two hours, that the majority of the neighborhood wanted the home to remain a single - family residence and most of the neighbors had signed petitions against the business coming into the neighborhood. Mayor Dailey closed the public hearing. The ordinance was read the first time. The rules were suspended by two - thirds vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number to provide for the second and third readings of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Hinton voted no on the suspension of rules. The ordinance was read the second and third times. A roll call vote was taken and recorded as follows: Directors Pugh, Cazort, Keck, Stewart, Kumpuris, voted in favor, Directors Hurst, Wyrick, Graves, Adcock, Vice 7 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 Mayor Hinton, Mayor Dailey vote in opposition. The vote was 5 yes, 6 no; the ordinance failed. 22. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE. - To appeal the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the establishment of a Planned Zoning District titled Levi Revised Short -Form PD -R located on the southwest corner of Monroe and "C" Street. Planning Commission: 0 yes, 8 no, 3 absent. Staff recommends denial. Synopsis: The applicant proposes to revise a previously approved Planned Residential Development to allow the creation of a four -lot plat. Mayor Dailey opened the public hearing. Mr. Jim Lawson gave an overview of the property. Mr. Lawson stated staff did not support the creation of a four -lot plat, but would support the lot line being moved over that would decrease the size of Lot 2 R, but then it would go back to a duplex on that tract of ground. He said staff did not support adding another lot on a substandard street. Mr. Tom Carpenter, City Attorney stated that since there is an amendment, his suggestion would be to send the application back to the Planning Commission. Director Kumpuris moved, seconded by Director Keck to send the item back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Dailey explained to Mr. Lance Levi, the applicant, that if the Board votes to uphold the Planning Commission's position that denies the request, then the applicant would have to wait one year before he could come back and apply again. The Board gave Mr. Levi the option of the Board voting on the issue tonight, or letting it go back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Carpenter explained that if sent back, it would not go back to the original process, that there is an ordinance that allows the Board to direct a matter back to the Planning Commission. This would be directed back to consider the option that is being requested. Mr. Lawson stated it could possibly go back to the Planning Commission in November. Mr. Levi stated he didn't like making this kind of decision on the spur of the moment. Mr. Carpenter suggested that if the meeting was reconvened, the Board could go ahead and vote to send the item back to the Planning Commission, that gets the process started, and then Mr. Levi comes back in a week, and if at that time Mr. Levi decides he wants the Board to go ahead and vote, the meeting could be recessed and the item could be reconsidered at that time, and then vote on the item then. Mr. Levi stated he had decided to go back to the Planning Commission. Director Cazort explained to Mr. Levi that what would happen is that this meeting would be recessed tonight, and the item would be placed on the agenda next week. Ms. Ruth Bell and Ms. Lynn Eubank were present to speak in opposition to the proposed project, but declined to speak since the item was going to be voted on to go back to the Planning Commission. A vote was taken on the motion to send the item back to the Planning Commission; by unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the motion carried. 23. ORDINANCE NO. 18,975 - To amend Ordinance No. 18,844 (March 18, 2003) which prohibits the placing of obstructions in the public right -of -way; providing for removal by the City obstructions left in the right -of -way after notice to remove; and for other purposes. (as amended on 10- 7 -03). (0 reading held on October 7, 2003.) The ordinance was read the second time. The rules were suspend by two - thirds vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number to place the ordinance on third and final reading. Director Kumpuris voted no on suspending the rules. The ordinance was read the third time. Mr. John Bracey spoke in opposition to the ordinance saying it singled out people that had basketball goals. Jane Harrison spoke in opposition saying that in her cul -de -sac you cannot get in and out of the circle because of people paying basketball, and did not think it was safe to allow basketball goals on the street. Ed Slayter, spoke in opposition to any amendment to the ordinance, and the ordinance was passed originally because there was a problem and there continues to be a problem. He said he has a neighbor who has a basketball goal on the street in front of his house. He stated it gets in the way of several people trying to get in and out of their driveways and when the trash truck comes, they have to get out of the truck and place the can in the middle of the street to dump it. The resident has received two warnings, written and verbal, but continues to move the object back and forth into the street, and back into the yard. He said the solution is simple, give a warning first, and if another complaint is received against the same offender, either seize the property or levy a substantial fine that will send a message this is not acceptable. Mayor Dailey asked for a roll call vote which was recorded as follows: Directors Pugh, Hurst, Cazort, Keck, Stewart, Graves, Vice E:3 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 Mayor Hinton, Mayor Dailey vote in opposition. The vote was 5 yes, 6 no; the ordinance failed. 22. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE. - To appeal the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the establishment of a Planned Zoning District titled Levi Revised Short -Form PD -R located on the southwest corner of Monroe and "C" Street. Planning Commission: 0 yes, 8 no, 3 absent. Staff recommends denial. Synopsis: The applicant proposes to revise a previously approved Planned Residential Development to allow the creation of a four -lot plat. Mayor Dailey opened the public hearing. Mr. Jim Lawson gave an overview of the property. Mr. Lawson stated staff did not support the creation of a four -lot plat, but would support the lot line being moved over that would decrease the size of Lot 2 R, but then it would go back to a duplex on that tract of ground. He said staff did not support adding another lot on a substandard street. Mr. Tom Carpenter, City Attorney stated that since there is an amendment, his suggestion would be to send the application back to the Planning Commission. Director Kumpuris moved, seconded by Director Keck to send the item back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Dailey explained to Mr. Lance Levi, the applicant, that if the Board votes to uphold the Planning Commission's position that denies the request, then the applicant would have to wait one year before he could come back and apply again. The Board gave Mr. Levi the option of the Board voting on the issue tonight, or letting it go back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Carpenter explained that if sent back, it would not go back to the original process, that there is an ordinance that allows the Board to direct a matter back to the Planning Commission. This would be directed back to consider the option that is being requested. Mr. Lawson stated it could possibly go back to the Planning Commission in November. Mr. Levi stated he didn't like making this kind of decision on the spur of the moment. Mr. Carpenter suggested that if the meeting was reconvened, the Board could go ahead and vote to send the item back to the Planning Commission, that gets the process started, and then Mr. Levi comes back in a week, and if at that time Mr. Levi decides he wants the Board to go ahead and vote, the meeting could be recessed and the item could be reconsidered at that time, and then vote on the item then. Mr. Levi stated he had decided to go back to the Planning Commission. Director Cazort explained to Mr. Levi that what would happen is that this meeting would be recessed tonight, and the item would be placed on the agenda next week. Ms. Ruth Bell and Ms. Lynn Eubank were present to speak in opposition to the proposed project, but declined to speak since the item was going to be voted on to go back to the Planning Commission. A vote was taken on the motion to send the item back to the Planning Commission; by unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the motion carried. 23. ORDINANCE NO. 18,975 - To amend Ordinance No. 18,844 (March 18, 2003) which prohibits the placing of obstructions in the public right -of -way; providing for removal by the City obstructions left in the right -of -way after notice to remove; and for other purposes. (as amended on 10- 7 -03). (0 reading held on October 7, 2003.) The ordinance was read the second time. The rules were suspend by two - thirds vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number to place the ordinance on third and final reading. Director Kumpuris voted no on suspending the rules. The ordinance was read the third time. Mr. John Bracey spoke in opposition to the ordinance saying it singled out people that had basketball goals. Jane Harrison spoke in opposition saying that in her cul -de -sac you cannot get in and out of the circle because of people paying basketball, and did not think it was safe to allow basketball goals on the street. Ed Slayter, spoke in opposition to any amendment to the ordinance, and the ordinance was passed originally because there was a problem and there continues to be a problem. He said he has a neighbor who has a basketball goal on the street in front of his house. He stated it gets in the way of several people trying to get in and out of their driveways and when the trash truck comes, they have to get out of the truck and place the can in the middle of the street to dump it. The resident has received two warnings, written and verbal, but continues to move the object back and forth into the street, and back into the yard. He said the solution is simple, give a warning first, and if another complaint is received against the same offender, either seize the property or levy a substantial fine that will send a message this is not acceptable. Mayor Dailey asked for a roll call vote which was recorded as follows: Directors Pugh, Hurst, Cazort, Keck, Stewart, Graves, Vice 8 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors October 21, 2003 Mayor Hinton, and Mayor Dailey voted yes, Directors: Wyrick, Kumpuris, and Adcock voted no. The ordinance passed. 24. REPORT - City of Little Rock Board of Directors 25. REPORT - City Manager's Activity Report Director Cazort made a motion to recess the meeting to Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003, seconded by Director Graves. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present the meeting was recessed at 10:15 PM. ATTEST: APPROVED: ?4,11 C I