Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-01-05Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February I, 2005 6:00 PM MINUTES BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING City Hall — 500 W. Markham February 1, 2005 The Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas met in regular session with Mayor Dailey Presiding. City Clerk, Nancy Wood called the roll with the following Directors Present: Pugh, Stewart, Vice Mayor Hinton, Graves, Keck, Cazort, Wyrick, Graves and Mayor Dailey. Director Pugh gave the invocation, which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Dailey asked the Board to consider the listed modifications ADDITIONS: M -1. RESOLUTION 11,902 - To set the date of public hearing for February 15, 2005 for the formation of Municipal Improvement District of Little Rock, Arkansas. M -2. RESOLUTION 11,903 - To set the date of public hearing for February 15, 2005 for the formation of the Ashley Glenn Municipal Multi- purpose Property Owner's Improvement District of Little Rock, Arkansas. DEFERALS: 9. RESOLUTION - Defer to February 15, 2005 - To appoint Bond Counsel for the proposed 2005 Capital Equipment Short-term Financing Project and for other purposes. WITHDRAWALS: 15. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE - (Applicant's Request) - Z -7700 — To rescind the Planning Commission's action in denying a zoning request titled Basham Cantrell Long Form POD located on the south side of Cantrell Road, just west of Taylor Loop Road. Planning Commission: S ayes, 4 noes, 2 absent. Staff recommends approval. (Deferred from January 18, 2005) Synopsis: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R -2, Single - family to POD to allow the development of the site with a three lot plat /plan for six office buildings. A motion was made by Adcock seconded by Director Keck, to make the listed modifications. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the modifications were made. Mayor Dailey introduced Boy Scout Troop 24. Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1.2005 6:00 PM PRESENTATIONS: Adjutant General Don Morrow— Partnership with the Racial Cultural Diversity Commission Mayor Dailey introduced Mr. Ken Smith, representing the Audubon Society, to address a bill that has been introduced at the Senate dealing with something that challenges the city's authorities around Lake Maumelle and our water sources. Mayor Dailey stated Mr. Smith had actually signed up for citizens communication but the Board had been discussing for the last couple of years, and it has become even more imperative that the City has direct involvement in, and that is the protection of our water supply and water sources. Mayor Dailey brought the board up to date by stating that this morning a conference call was held with Jim Harvey from the Water Department, himself, Tom Carpenter, City Attorney, Bruce Moore, City Manager, and Judge Buddy Villines, Pulaski County, and Mayor Pat Hayes from North Little Rock to figure out how to approach this in a unified way, and to let as many people know that can be influenced that they opposed Senate Bill 230, which seems innocuous in title because it talks about the protection of our water, but when you read the emphasis in it, not only does it impact the city's ability to protect the water by the use of traditional eminent domain in cases but challenges that and sets up other bureaucratic mechanisms to be able to address the needs or the interests of the private sector. He said each one in the meeting has begun personal contact to the senators. He stated they have received fairly encouraging news from groups like the Arkansas Municipal League, where there is clear understanding that the usurps much of what local government is about, which is the ability to use eminent domain and other methods to protect the public's interest. Ken Smith, Audubon Society, stated he was here representing a partnership of Arkansas Conservation Organizations that includes the Arkansas Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, Ozark Society, League of Women Voters, the Arkansas Public Policy Panel and others. These groups have express concern regarding S13230, which is ironically named the Water Quality Protection Act of 2005. From their prospective, it really restricts public water utilities ability to exercise eminent domain to protect what is the economic engine for Central Arkansas or for any community such as Northwest Arkansas. Good high quality public drinking water is the engine that fuels our lives and economic and environmental development of our state. This puts at risk our public drinking water supplies, and could lead to increased water rates for the citizens of the state. That is a problem because with more pollution that comes from development in a very fragile watershed comes more treatment. That runs up the cost of treating that water. It's all for what? Primarily, it is for financial gain. He said as much as he is for financial gain, thought in this instance, it sacrifices too much for what a few would gain from this. Mr. Smith said the two fundamental flaws of the bill are first, it greatly restricts the authority of a water utility to exercise eminent domain, makes it a last option rather than a first option. It should not be so restrictive in its use that a utility cannot use it. The second thing is that it relies on voluntary stewardship agreements. There is no incentive or requirement that requires a landowner to enter into an agreement with a public water utility. If there is not some incentive, then why would any developer want to put their development through a stewardship agreement that then is enforceable by a state agency? 2 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM Mr. Bruce Moore, City Manager, asked Andre Bernard and Barbara Hyatt to update the Board on the Rolling Hills Mobile Home Park. He stated that Community Housing and Neighborhood Programs, facilitators, and code enforcement staff had done an outstanding job, and thanked Director Adcock for calls she made in getting items donated. Mr. Bernard, Director of Community Housing, stated that staff has been working with several residents of the Rolling Hills Mobile Home Park over the past few days and sixty families in total were affected. Through staff, and donations, they were able to meet the needs of over fifty of those families. Over a hundred boxes of food, clothing, blankets, toasters, portable heaters, etc, were donated and are currently being distributed out of the west central alert center on John Barrow Road. There is a meeting scheduled tomorrow afternoon with the property owner, the property owners' attorney as well as some of the residents to continue to address some of their continued concerns related to conversion of the gas lines to propane. He stated the Board and City Manager would continue to be updated as to the progress. Director Adcock announced that anytime a call was made, people responded in the community. She thanked staff for their wonderful support, and said that they did an outstanding job. Director Adcock stated (before the consent agenda was read) that the Community Housing Advisory Board met in an emergency meeting on Friday, and they looked at items 2,3,4,5 and 6, and all agreed these items should receive a "do pass" from the City Board. CONSENT AGENDA (Items 1 -10) 1. MOTION - To approve minutes of regular Board of Directors Meeting: December 7, 2004 and Dec. 21, 2004 and the Reconvened Meeting: December 14, 2004. 2. RESOLUTION 11,904 - To authorize the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 100 unit East View Terrace Apartment complex, located at 1200 Geyer Street, using low - income housing tax credits from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. Staff Recommends approval. Synopsis: Approval of resolution authorizing the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 100 unit Eastview Terrace Apartment complex using low income housing tax credits. 3. RESOLUTION 11,905 - To authorize the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 100 unit Fair Oaks Apartments located at 9600 W. 36th Street, using low income housing credits and home funds from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Approval of resolution authorizing the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for low income housing tax credits and home funds from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. 4. RESOLUTION 11,906 - To authorize the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 144 unit Our Way Apartments located at 10434 W. 36th Street, using low income housing credits and home funds from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Approval of resolution authorizing the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 144 unit Our Way Apartment complex using low income housing tax credits. Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM 5. RESOLUTION 11,907 - To authorize the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for constructing a 40 unit Senior Assisted Living Development located in College Station, using low income housing credits and home funds from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Approval of resolution authorizing the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for construction of a 40 unit senior assisted living development (Fruit of the Spirit Limited Partnership Assisted Living Project) in College Station using low income housing tax credits. 6. RESOLUTION 11,908 - To authorize the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 156 unit Squire Court Apartments located at 5201 Geyer Springs Road, using low income housing credits and HOME Funds from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Synopsis: Approval of resolution authorizing the Mayor to issue a Letter of Support for renovating the 156 unit Squire Court Apartment Complex using low income housing tax credits. 7. RESOLUTION 11,909 - Authorizing use of eminent domain on the Fourche Dame Pike Road reconstruction project (Richland Drive to Plantation Drive), in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Authorizing the use of eminent domain for up to eleven parcels of land on the Fourche Dam Pike (Richland Drive to Plantation Drive for street construction project). 8. RESOLUTION 11,910 - Authorizing use of eminent domain on the Franklin Elementary School sidewalks project in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. 2004 Bond Project. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Authorizing the use of eminent domain for up to two parcels of land on the Franklin Elementary School Sidewalks Project on South Harrison Street (14th Street to 20th Street). The project was selected for School Area Pedestrian Safety Improvements from the 2004 Bond Issue. 9. RESOLUTION Deferred to 02/15/05 - To appoint Bond Counsel for the proposed 2005 Capital Equipment Short-term Financing Project and for other purposes. 10. RESOLUTION 11,911 - Of endorsement of the Little Rock Board of Directors to assist and introduce passage of legislation to amend the Public Facilities Board stature to allow persons with special expertise to be able to continue to serve. The Consent Agenda, consisting of items 1 -10 and Items M -1 and M -2 was read. A motion was made by Director Adcock, seconded by Director Hurst, to adopt the Consent Agenda. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the Consent Agenda was adopted. CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS — There was no speakers present at tonight's meeting. M Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT GROUPED ITEMS: Items 11 & 12 11. ORDINANCE 19,267 - Amending Chapter 30 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, providing for a waiver of Master Street Plan Construction Requirements for Maryland Avenue, in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: Authorizes a waiver of street improvements for Maryland Avenue under the Master Street Plan for construction of a 5000 square foot warehouse. 12. ORDINANCE 19,268 - Z -7740 — Reclassifying property located at 10905 West Markham Street; amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock. Planning Commission: 8 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: The owner of the 4.53 acre property at 10905 West Markham Street is requesting that the zoning of the north 2.42 acres be reclassified from R -2 to C -3 and the zoning of the south 2.11 acres be reclassified from R -2 to OS (floodway). Items 11 and 12 were read the first time. A motion was made by Director Adcock, seconded by Director Hurst, to suspend the rules and place the ordinances on second reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thrids in number, the rules were suspended and the ordinances were read the second time. Director Adcock, seconded by Director Hinton, made the motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinances on third and final reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present being two - thrids in number, the rules were suspended and the ordinances were read the third time. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being tow - thirds in number, the ordinances passed. SEPARATE ITEMS: Items 13 - 17 13. ORDINANCE 19,269 - Z -5803 — Approving a Planned Zoning Development and establishing a Planned Commercial District titled Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short - Form PCD located at 12601 West Markham Street in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock, and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 7 ayes, 2 noes, 2 absent. Staff recommends denial Synopsis: The applicant proposes to place sixteen banners on eight light poles advertising the four franchises held by the automobile dealership. Director Keck asked for staff to explain the reason for denial. Mr. Tony Bozynski, Planning Director, stated in 1994, when the original PCD was approved for an auto dealership there were a number of conditions set out in that approval to control the use of the property. No body shop, Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM where the cars could be test driven, no outdoor speakers, but in addition to that, the applicant at that time, or the owner, made assurances that they would not return to the Planning Commission, to seek a revision to allow for the placement of banners, or those kinds of extra things on this property, and staff feels that since that time, other than the ownership changing, nothing else has changed on the property. Director Keck asked if there was not a dealer in the area that does use banners periodically. Mr. Bozynski answered that question came up at the Planning Commission level, about the car dealership to the west of this one in question, and staff went out and made a site visit and did not see any banners. He said there are, what he referred to as architectural features, where banners will indicate things like "Chenal Commons ", not advertising a specific product such as this is being proposed for. The ordinance was read the first time. Director Adcock, seconded by Director Keck made the motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number, the rules were suspended and the ordinance was read the second time. Mr. Bill Gwatney, applicant, stated this lot was difficult to get into, there are three franchises on this piece of property and its poorly marked and difficult to drive through, and from his point of view was poorly planned originally. He said they have tried to follow the rules; they hired an attorney to research exactly how to do this. He said they went to the Planning Commission by the rules; they notified all the businesses in the area, by the rules. No one objected. One citizen did come to the Planning Commission, and assumed there were people here to speak against this tonight. He said all he wanted to do was put up some 3' by 8' banners. Five of the banners face West Markham, only three will face Chenal. He said they have had a sound business record for over fifty years. He said all he wanted to do was indicate by banner, that the Buicks are here, the Pontiacs are here, and the GMC trucks are here. The flags would be movable and reason is that there are various times of the year when he would rotate the brands out front. Mr. Gwatnet stated he wants to be a good corporate citizen, to sell cars, and use the banners to mark their location and for his business to grow. He said he would not put anything out there that would look unacceptable to the environment or to what the original idea was when they located on Chenal. Director Keck asked Mr. Gwatney what, as a business person, he had observed on the weekends in the area of his business. Mr. Gwatney replied that on weekends he had observed people putting things in the right of way, which they had not done, and would not do. He stated that on weekends, it appears that anything goes. Vice Mayor Graves stated a great portion of West Little Rock does not play by the rules. They put signs up on the weekends and take them down on Mondays. She stated that she and Mr. Moore, City Manager, had visited about this, and would be revisiting the sign ordinance and enforcement. Mr. Moore stated staff is reviewing the banner ordinance and expect some recommendations to come before the Board in the next thirty to forty -five days. Vice Mayor Graves said the issue is that once the City opens that door, it has to be opened for everyone equally. Mr. Gwatney stated that he believed a case by case basis would be the solution, because the size of the banners/ flags would be different depending on where they want to place it. Director Cazort stated there are not enforcement officers out on weekends and agreed that temporary signage in the city needs to be addressed in a manner that can be both uniform for usage and uniform for enforcement. Director Adcock stated if Mr. Moore is going to bring this issue to the Board in thirty to forty five days, would there be a way for Mr. Gwatney to apply for a temporary permit to have his signs until after the new ordinance comes up. If it doesn't comply, then remove them. At least this would give him an opportunity to go ahead. Mayor Dailey stated part of that question would be for Mr. Moore and part for Mr. 0 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM Gwatney because these are probably not inexpensive banners. Mr. Moore was not sure if these banners would fall under the review that is being conducted but would come to the Board with a comprehensive review of the entire ordinance. Mayor Dailey stated there is not a temporary provision for these types of banners. Ron Hope, speaking in favor of the applicant stated the city currently places banners almost exactly like what Mr. Gwatney is proposing, within the same block or two of this location. The Boo at the Zoo Banners are almost identical to what they are trying to do. The purpose for the banners is to identify the different areas and assist in the traffic flow to the areas. Mr. Hope stated he believed this was a reasonable request and something Mr. Gwatney needs in his business development. Kathleen Oleson spoke in opposition to the permit saying in 1994 this application was changed to a Planned Commercial Development and there was a lot of opposition at the time. There were a lot of agreements and accommodations made to satisfy the concerns of the neighbors. One of the things the neighbors said at that time was that this was not a good piece of property to have an auto dealership because you couldn't see a lot and it was up and why would someone even want to put a dealership in this location. It was agreed to that this would be the rules and regulations that the auto dealership went in. Ms. Oleson stated she did not think it was right for the citizens of this city to come down, even though it was eleven years ago, to being up an issue, to have something passed, and there should be a matter of trust that when this is agreed to, and there is nothing that has changed, except for the fact that it is now a scenic corridor, -that there should now be banners allowed. The agreements go with the land not with the owner of the property. This was agreed to with this piece of property and urged the Board to vote against the permit, and let the citizens know that the City honors agreements that are reached. Mr. Gwatney pointed out that the character of that area has changed dramatically over the last years and the fact is, it is today, not eleven years ago. Director Cazort made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third and final reading, Director Hurst seconded the motion, and by voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number, the rules were suspended and the ordinance was read the third time. A roll call vote was taken and recorded as follows: Directors: Pugh, no, Keck, yes, Wyrick, yes, Stewart, yes, Hurst, yes, Cazort, yes, Hinton, no, Adcock, no, Kumpuris, yes, Vice Mayor Graves, no, Mayor Dailey, no. The ordinance passed. 14. ORDINANCE 19,270 - To accept 21 acres in two tracts along Crystal Valley Road, north of Stagecoach Road in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. (Diamond Annexation). Planning Commission: 7 ayes, 0 noes, 4 absent. Staff recommends approval. Synopsis: To accept approximately 21 acres in two tracts along Crystal Valley Road, north of Stagecoach Road in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas. The ordinance was read the first time. Mr. Randy Frazier, stated he was representing the applicants, Jim Hastings and Mike Lake, principles of Diamond Properties, and announced Mr. Pat McGetrick, engineer was present to answer any questions regarding the engineering on the property, and Mr. Doug Woodall, real estate agent, with Raney Realty who has been involved in this project, was also here to answer questions. Mr. Frazier stated they had been to the Planning Commission for a plat of this property that was approved April 8, 2004. The case was appealed to the Circuit Court of Pulaski County. The County Judge, Mr. Villines approved the order approving the annexation on August 19, 2004. The Planning Commission then approved this annexation by unanimous voice vote at the Planning Commission Meeting on December 16, 2004, and on December 30th, the Circuit Court dismissed the case of the challenge to the plat and now the applicant is before the Board for what 7 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM he hoped would be an approval of the annexation. Mr. Frazier stated the annexation request consists of two pieces of property, one is approximately seven acres on which the plat that has been filed and approved, proposes thirty lots. The other property is for twelve acres, and the proposal, or the plat filed is for forty -eight lots. The property is zoned R -2, residential, in a growing area off Stagecoach Road. Other developments that have taken place in the recent past are the Crystal Valley Manor Subdivision, the Henderson Subdivision, Eagles Nest, the Dyke Annexation, and the Granwood Subdivision, a growing vital area of Little Rock. Mr. Frazier stated the property is contiguous to the City limits, and is surrounded, almost creating an island where the city limits currently exist. The proposal for the plats is for residential single family homes on the lots. He stated Little Rock is woefully short on entry level starter homes. The proposed plan is to build homes that are roughly in the hundred twenty to one hundred and seventy thousand dollar price range. The minimum square footage would be around fourteen hundred square feet, which would be governed by the Bill of Assurance. The total lots would be seventy -eight between the two annexed properties. Mr. Frazier stated questions had been raised concerning police and fire protection, traffic, utilities, drainage, etc. He stated the staff write up indicated that both departments have stated that service to this area would not be a problem. Mr. Frazier addressed traffic issues saying that Crystal Valley Road is a collector street, which will service up to five thousand, some double of that, of cars per day. These two subdivisions would not take a toll on the existing traffic pattern. The developer in this case would have to pay for the extension of the utilities for the subdivisions. Once the subdivisions are in place the streets, would be maintained by the city. He said that there are some concerns from the neighbors concerning drainage issues. He stated that these issues have been thoroughly discussed at the Planning Commission that is part of the platting process. Any drainage problems would have to be addressed in the actual development of the subdivision in accordance with all city ordinances and requirements. Mr. George Herrill stated he owned the property the development is buying, and stated he had lived on this property all his life and could understand why the neighbors didn't want a bunch of houses there, but two years ago lightening struck his home and it burned down. He said he tried to decide what do with the property and decided he couldn't build back there, and basically it is still a piece of property that produces five or six hundred dollars a year in taxes, and anyone of the new homes will be nicer than what is out there, and they would produced hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in tax base for the City of Little Rock. The development is running a large water line, and will be able others to join on to at that time. The drainage drains down across the property and has been doing that for hundreds of years, and whether this is passed or not, it's not going to quit raining and the water will continue to run across there, and the people building the homes will make sure the water problem is taken care of. Speakers in opposition were Berry Haas, Eric Hardin, Susan Hardin, Rodman Ritchie, Nina Orsini, Tami Johnson, Karen Hooks, and Frank Vorester, who cited the following reasons for opposition. Drainage is a major issue in this area; the area is prone to flooding, with vast amounts of water that cross the property, which is located at the bottom end of a watershed area. Some of the residents said their property is directly affected by water runoff now, and if the development goes in their fears are that they will have flooding or great amounts of water crossing their property. They discussed the right of the citizens to refile the lawsuit if the annexation is approved. They stated that Judge Villines had signed the petition for Annexation, but basically this was an administrative duty, and had no option but to pass this on to the City. The opposition contended that higher taxes and fees would be added for every Little Rock Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM resident. They cited inadequate fire protection, indicating that KARK TV had just last night done a story on fire response times, indicating that almost one out of every ten calls takes more than six minutes response time. Police protection is a problem, with their ever dwindling manpower. Annexations will only add to further delays in police response time. Traffic issues were discussed, with the opposition stating that Crystal Valley is a collector street, is narrow and intersects with Stagecoach Road is already one of the worst five spots in Little Rock for traffic congestion. The green space will be limited, no provisions for parks and recreation space and potential pollution of drinking water wells, additional infrastructure costs, lack of city transit. Ms. Hardin mentioned that she had brought a letter to City Hall and had asked that it be distributed to the Mayor and Board of Directors, and asked if they had received it. The Board indicated they had received it. There was mention that the Planning Commission had indicated that they had no choice but to pass the application, i.e., the Richardson Case, and that their hands were tied. Director Hurst asked Mr. Carpenter the City Attorney why the Planning Commission had to pass this item. Mr. Carpenter stated he was not at the Planning Commission meeting, but the Richardson Case says if you meet certain requirements set forth in the ordinance then the Planning Commission doe not have the discretion to change what the requirements are in the ordinance but that is different from an annexation. Mr. Tony Bozynski, stated that what Mr. Ritchie was referring to were comments made at the Planning Commission hearing on the two plats, not on the annexation. The two plats met all the technical requirements and that is basically the Richardson Case. If the technical requirements are met on a plat then it is required that it be approved. The annexation could have been denied by the Planning Commission. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter about the statement made, that if this annexation was approved, the neighborhood citizens would file suit. Mr. Carpenter stated he thought that Mr. Haas said if the annexation is approved, then certain issues would become right, and they would follow through with litigation at that time. Mr. Haas stated that was correct. Mr. Frazier asked to give Mr. Carpenter a copy of the Judge's Order. After reviewing, Mr. Carpenter stated the dismissal was because there was a suit for which there had not been a final action until the Board acts, there is no final action. Mayor Dailey stated then if the Board acts then they can sue. Mr. Carpenter agreed that the could sue. Mr. Frazier stated that is correct on that order. The City was a named defendant, and that is dismissed, but they have the right if the annexation is approved, to refile. It is not dismissed with prejudice. Mr. Frazier stated that on an annexation as compared to a zoning or a conditional use, or some other land use application, annexation by its nature pits in the city for development in the city to be brought into the city versus citizens who are not part of the city. He pointed out that their staff, city staff, the Planning Commission and a number of people involved in the city have seriously studied the issues regarding, fire, police, and traffic and as a citizen himself, takes great faith in the efforts they put forth to study this; not only for this development but for others. The only issue before the Board is the annexation and would like the data from the real estate study to go in the record, and also the exhibit he had brought tonight, and would like to make sure the records of all the staff recommendations are included in the record also. Director Wyrick asked what the developer would do if the annexation is not passed. Mr. Frazier stated that basically urban sprawl would occur and create larger problems as the area continues to develop properties not annexed in. Mr. Frazier stated that the residents, if this area is annexed, though not in the city, could tie into the water for a fee if they chose. Mayor Dailey closed the public hearing. Director Keck, seconded by Director Hurst, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on second Z Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number the rules were suspended to provide for the second reading. The ordinance was read the second time. Director Adcock, seconded by Director Hurst, made a motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinance on third reading. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, being two - thirds in number the rules were suspended to provide for the third reading. The ordinance was read the third time. A roll call vote was taken and recorded as follows: Directors: Pugh, yes, Keck, yes, Wyrick, no, Stewart, no, Hurst, yes, Cazort, yes, Hinton, no, Adcock, no, Kumpuris, yes, Vice Mayor Graves, yes, Mayor Dailey, yes. The ordinance passed. 15. PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE - Withdrawn by Applicant - Z -7700 — To rescind the Planning Commission's action in denying a zoning request titled Basham Cantrell Long Form POD located on the south side of Cantrell Road, just west of Taylor Loop Road. Planning Commission: 5 ayes, 4 noes, 2 absent. Staff recommends approval. (Deferred from January 18, 2005) Synopsis: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R -2, Single - family to POD to allow the development of the site with a three lot plat /plan for six office buildings. Mayor Dailey recessed the meeting at 8:00 pm for a short Board break. The meeting reconvened at 8:25 pm. 16. ORDINANCE 19,271 - Z -7773 — Approving a Planned Zoning Development and establishing a Planned Residential District titled Whispering Hills Long -Form PD -R located south of Alexander Road, west of Pam Drive South, in the City of Little Rock, Arkansas amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Little Rock; and for other purposes. Planning Commission: 7 ayes, 2 noes, 2 absent. Staff recommends approval. (Held on 1st Reading 01- 04-05) Deferred from January 18, 2005. Synopsis: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R -2 single - family to PD -R to allow the development of the site with single - family homes. 17. ORDINANCE 19,272 - S -1454 — Grant variances from Various Lot Development Standards of Chapter 31 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, providing for a variance to allow reduced front building line (15 ft.) on the proposed residential lots for the Whispering Hills Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located south of Alexander Road, west of Pam Drive South. Planning Commission: 7 ayes, 2 noes, 2 absent. Staff recommends approval. (Held on 1st Reading 01- 04 -05). Deferred from January 18, 2005. Synopsis: The applicant proposes to rezone the site from R -2 single- family to PD -R to allow the development of the site with single - family homes. Mayor Dailey announced that on Items 16 and 17, he would suggest the group have a sequence of the speakers they would like to speak as there would be a fifteen minute time limit on each side. He said there are approximately twenty speakers to speak in opposition. The ordinances, Item 16 and 17 were read the first time on January 4, 2005. Mr. Paul Evans, applicant, stated he feels he has made the best agreement possible with the neighborhood and 10 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM would like to save his time for rebuttal to what the opposition may have to say. Director Keck asked Mr. Evans to address the drainage issue, which has been the main point of contention in the issue. Mr. Evans stated the ordinance had been amended to include a detailed layout of all the drainage issues from Whispering Hills Neighborhood. Issues addressed were the homes square footage of the area of heat and cooled area, which would be at least 1500 square feet with an attached garage. The exterior, which would be brick and siding, the front yard, side yards and fifteen feet in the year yard. A six foot fence on the western boundary of the proposed subdivision which would go beside a couple of the homes. Director Adcock stated she had not seen a copy of the new ordinance with all the new changes in it, and asked Mr. Bozynski to go over the new ordinance. Mr. Bozynski stated that since the January 11 meeting, staff had received clarification and worked with Mr. Evans. The revised ordinance has thirteen conditions. Director Adcock asked what kind of barricade would be used. Mr. Bozynski stated the standard approved city barricade would be used, and the developer would pay that expense. These speaking in opposition were Reggie Crouse, who asked those who were present, and opposed to the development to stand. Mr. Crouse stated they did meet with Mr. Evans on January 4th. He stated that staff and planning and development, public works, a representative from the community block grant program, and two board members also attended. At this meeting a lot of ground was covered, a lot of drainage issues were brought up. He stated there were only a few objections left to the development as applied for. The neighbors believed that it is inconsistent with the existing homes in the area, the average square footage in the immediate area they believed is a minimum of 2000 square feet, and in the larger area, there are several that range from 2500 to 3000 square feet. There are some immediate and scattered through the area, some in the 1200 to 1500 square foot range as well. These homes that are in the PRD are 20% smaller, and on a lot approximately 66% smaller than the ones around in the subdivision. Many of the residents would love to see new development in their area, but with homes more comparable in size than the homes that have been proposed here. The soil conditions are poor in the area, and think consideration should be given to this. The reason they think this should be a consideration to Mr. Evans and to the prospective residents and the City of Little Rock, is that this is located on an expansive clay base which shifts through out the year. The foundations for the homes in this area, cannot be constructed the same way, or should not be constructed the same as most homes in Little rock without the proper preliminary foundation planning and work, the foundations will crack when the clay either dries out or becomes wet from the rains. Two homes in Phase I Subdivision have experienced foundation problems, which have resulted in decreasing real estate values in the area. This would impact the sale of the homes, leaving behind an unlivable house, a defaulted loan, and community block grant money wasted, and thus causing lower property values in the neighborhood. The neighborhood did not believe that low income or moderate low income homes are consistent with the existing homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Crouse stated they believe this will set the standard for additional low income affordable houses to be constructed in the area, changing the entire makeup of the neighborhood and reducing property values. Director Kumpuris asked if forms of financing should be considered. Mr. Carpenter, City Attorney stated in forms of financing, no, the question is a zoning question as to whether the Board thinks it is an appropriate use within this particular area with the conditions that have been placed in the ordinance and is a result of the agreements in the ordinance as a result of the agreements, in terms of the financing aspect, the answer is no. Other residents voiced concerns such as the volume of water crossing the property, 11 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM the fact that the engineer, Mr. Laha, had resigned as engineer for the project and that the drainage issues may not be taken care of as completely as Mr. Evans would like the Board to believe. There is no green space for the kids; there are no plans for sidewalks, neighborhood review of the engineering plans, fear of the small houses, with small lots, increases the density of the population. Ms. Ruth Bell stated the Planning Commission had a number of meetings on this application and the predecessor application to this. Over and over again the people who spoke at those meetings were concerned about traffic implications, wanted to know when this area is fully built out, that the city will be able to provide the street carrying capacity that the built out area will need. Homer Ellis stated he lives next door to the proposed development, stated there is a big ditch at the back of his property that has been washed out, and if a road is put in and the road washed out, would the city come in and repair the damage. Mr. Moore, City Manager, stated the city would be responsible for the maintenance of the road. He said the ditch is over ten feet deep and over thirty feet wide, and this all washed out at one time, and could possibly happen again. He asked the board to reject this proposal and accept the offer the applicant offered at first with fewer homes and bigger lots. Preston Heffner spoke in opposition, saying he lived on Vimey Ridge Road and was not near the proposed building but was located about a quarter mile away, and it was not uncommon for traffic to be backed up at his front door at 8 am in the morning. He said he was against any kind of building in that area unless the road was widened. There are deep ditches on both sides. He was opposed to low income or government subsidized housing. He said it sounds like "projects ", and to him "projects" are a breeding ground for crime, drug infestation, heavy population, traffic and littering. Mayor Dailey asked the City Manager, Bruce Moore, to explain how assistance to encourage certain types of housing development is used. Mr. Moore stated he respectfully disagreed with the analogy of the city's CDBG programs and the first time down payment assistance program, that are directed toward "projects ", he thought was the terminology. He said there are projects through out the city where residents are able to apply for first time home owner's assistance, usually up to 20% which is a significant advantage in promoting home ownership and there are some great developments thought the city that have used first time homebuyer's assistance. Citizens filling out cards in opposition, but that did not speak are as listed: Woody Ussery, Don Robbins, John Pemberton, Linda Pemberton, Lisa Pemberton, Courtney Jones, Josh Roberts, Andrea Roberts, Alisha Smith, Harold Willimas, Barbara Stole, Carroll Steele, Janette Johnson, Leonard Johnson, Jr. Marty Hopkins, Sue James, Bill James, G, Preston Hefner, DeVonne Hefner, Sandy Roberts, Shirley Davis, Ray Schieber, Paulette Bassett. Mr. Evans, the applicant stated it was amazing to him that people could take a situation and manipulate it, and twist it. He said at this point, he had nothing else to comment on. Director Kumpuris asked Mr. Evans to address the engineering and drainage situation. Mr. Evans answered that the ordinance specifically addresses the drainage issues. He said the engineer as of yesterday around 5:30 pm, faxed him a note saying that he has resigned due to extensive pressure from the neighborhood association, but that he has retained a second engineer who is out of town, and could not make it to the meeting tonight because of short notice. He said he does not have an engineering problem, he did not have a drainage problem that Public Works was there and went over every issue verbatim, with the neighborhood association, and they have it documented in writing in the ordinance, so as far as the Board, Planning Commission, it is addressed in the ordinance. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Guy Lowes, Public Works Director to comment on the issue. Mr. Lowes stated the issues that were set out in the proposed ordinance are doable. They have met with the former engineer, and did not see any problems. This is the 12 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February I, 2005 6:00 PM preliminary plat and the actual construction plans will come later, which is the normal procedure. Mayor Dailey asked how the City can ensure that the plans are complied with. Mr. Lowes stated if they do not meet the engineering criteria that the city has, then they will not get a final plat. The project would be shut down. Mr. Carpenter stated the permit would not be issued unless the engineering plans are approved. Director Hurst asked if the soil studies are done, since this has been mentioned several times. Mr. Bozynski, Planning Director, answered that on building plans for single family residences, there is minimal plan review. He did not think, and obviously not to the extent that it is done for commercial project or multi- family. Mr. Bozynski stated this did not come up as part of their review. Director Stewart asked if there was anything in the ordinance that staff was concerned about. Mr. Bozynski stated staff has supported the project all along, and the conditions tie it down even more and address some of the issues the neighborhood has raised over two or three months of dialog. Director Adcock asked Mr. Lowes why no sidewalks were in the plans. Mr. Lowes deferred the question to Mike Hood, Public Works staff, who was the representative that had attended several of the neighborhood meetings. Mr. Hood stated these would qualify under the ordinance as a minor residential street, and under the ordinance they would be exempt form sidewalk construction. That is by virtue of the length and the number of lots considered. Director Adcock asked what type of landscaping would be done, and what street improvements would be done on Alexander Road. Mr. Hood stated they are required to meet the standards for minor arterial streets, which would be a five lane section, but their frontage is very small, about seventy feet, so they would be required to set back the proper distance and move their curb back and make a nice wide apron. Director Adcock asked if they would have to curb and gutter up on Alexander Road. Mr. Hood stated they would. Director Wyrick stated she could attest to the soil conditions, and asked what they would do to keep the road stable. Mr. Lowes stated they would look at the engineering data then they would ask the design engineer to come up with a road to match the soil condition. Director Wyrick asked if the city would be there to monitor the road construction all the way through. Mr. Lowes said they would. Director Adcock asked about the landscaping. Mr.Boyzenski stated detailed landscaping plans had not been submitted, but typically, there would be the normal grass strip adjacent to the curb on either side of the street. Director Adcock stated there was a not sufficient side on the property to do landscaping, and what would be done in this case. Mr. Bozynski stated he believed this is where the water would be piped underground and there would be a twenty six foot strip, and thought the width of the property is approximately sixty -nine feet, so there would be some area on both sides of the curbs. Director Hinton asked if it was established that there is an improvement district in this area, and how will this subdivision contribute to paying off the debt. Mr. Bozynski stated there were two improvement districts in this area, one was sewer and one was water. The sewer improvement district has been paid out and the boundary of the water improvement district is the southern boundary of the property in question. If the subdivision ties on to it, then they would have to pay a tie -on fee to the water improvement district. The ordinances (Items 16 & 17) were read the second time. Director Cazort, seconded by Director Hurst made the motion to suspend the rules and place the ordinances on third and final readings. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the rules were suspended and the ordinances were read the third time. A roll call vote was taken and recorded as follows: Directors: Pugh, yes, Keck, no, Wyrick, no, Stewart, yes, Hurst, yes, Cazort, yes, Hinton, yes, Adcock, no, Kumpuris, yes, Vice Mayor Graves, yes, Mayor Dailey, yes. The ordinances passed. 13 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1, 2005 6:00 PM Director Keck stated that a couple of weeks ago, the Board voted on an in home day care on Lantana Drive. The vote was 5 to 4 opposing the day care. He stated he had the pleasure of watching a tape of that meeting, and the discussion that took place, and stated the Board managed to contradict themselves at least two different times during the course of the discussion. In addition to that there is an inconsistency in policy and how it has been implemented, and thought as a Board, needed to revisit this issue and have the benefit of all eleven members to discuss it. He then made the motion to reconsider the in -home day care application on Lantana Drive. Director Stewart seconded the motion. Mayor Dailey asked Mr. Carpenter, to be sure this was a proper motion based upon time frames, etc., and he would entertain the motion if it was proper. Mr. Carpenter stated the motion to reconsider has to be made at the next regular meeting, which is this meeting, it has to be made by someone who voted with the prevailing party, which was to deny the resolution, which Director Keck voted against before, and so the motion was proper. A roll call vote was taken on whether to reconsider the item. Director Cazort, to be clear, asked if the board would only be reconsidering this issue, or is it time to bring back up the entire policy and discuss that again. Director Keck stated he knew the Planning Staff had been working on the issue of home based business, and stated he was one of those who managed to contradict himself twice in a thirty minute discussion on this issue, and regrets doing that, and there was not a full board present. Director Wyrick stated she would like a map of all the day cares in and around this area. There are two more day care centers on the Planning Commission Agenda for next Thursday which are close to where this one is. There are a lot of day cares that are going in a small area in Ward 7, and would like for that to come forward so everyone could look at it. By majority voice vote the motion to reconsider carried. Director Adcock and Wyrick voted in opposition. Director Adcock asked that in addition to Director Wreck's request, she would like to have a map of all other day cares that has gone on in the whole city. Director Adcock stated the board has only looked at five or six day cares, other than those in southwest Little Rock, and those have been in the John Barrow area. She stated they have not looked at any in the west part of town, or in mid -town. Director Cazort asked if she was referring to in -home day cares that have come before this board, that care for more than five children, which means they had to get a permit from the City. Director Adcock stated yes, that city staff had gotten a list of them form DHS, so they have a list already. Director Adcock said she was talking about those that have come before this board that are on the list that DHS has furnished the city. Director Stewart stated all home business needs to be included because the sense she gets from the community, is that the city is only targeting one particular business. Mr. Moore stated he would like some clarification; staff has not started a comprehensive review of home based business ordinances. Mayor Dailey stated he thought that what is being talked about here, is an outcry from the community that relates to this specific category as opposed to an outcry for every category of business. Director Keck stated he was under the impression that staff was looking at home based businesses. Director Graves stated the Citizens Advisory Committee did address some home based businesses, and asked Mr. Troy Laha, who was a member of that committee if he recalled what was addressed. Mr. Laha stated some were addressed, but found there was so many of them that it was going to be almost impossible to address them all. What had been started, was picking them out of the telephone books, and advertising, and going after those who were publicizing they were operating out of their homes. 14 Minutes Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting February 1. 2005 6:00 PM Director Graves stated they were looking a business who was doing a certain quantity, such as music lessons, and set criteria for how many students, and what size of business. Mr. Bruce Moore stated he had received a letter from Mr. Guy Lowes, Public Works Director, that after forty -one years as an engineer, he would be retiring this spring. Mr. Moore thanked him for his service to the City. In light of that decision to retire, he stated he has asked the current Assistant City Manager, Bob Turner, to take over the interim role in Public Works, a position he once held, and that Mr. Turner had graciously accepted. A national search will be conducted for Mr. Lowes replacement. Mayor Dailey thanked Mr. Lowes for his service to the City and Community and wished him well. A motion was made by Director Cazort, seconded by Director Keck to adjourn. By unanimous voice vote of the Board members present, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 PM. ATTEST: 9�cy W0941- City Clerk APPROVED: Ji ailey, Mayor 15