Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail Corrspondence - SRT 1417 S. Park St. 120821 (2)From: Paul Dodds [mailto:paul@dodds.us] Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 7:54 PM To: bettonclinic@aol.com; cheatham.wil@gmail.com; kathodgeesq@gmail.com; todd.hart@baptist- health.org; mhaynes@21cjs.com; platture@yahoo.com; rochelle17usa@gmail.com; ArkRealEstate@aol.com; vickerscap@gmail.com; ravogeljr@gmail.com Cc: Denise Leeson <dannleeson@gmail.com>; Kathy Wells <wordsmithlr@gmail.com>; Nancy Rousseau <nancy.rousseau@lrsd.org>; Thrower, Torrence <tthrower@littlerock.gov>; Moore, Monte <MMoore@littlerock.gov>; Collins, Gilbert <gcollins@littlerock.gov>; Miller Jr., Virgil <vmiller@littlerock.gov>; Joyce Matthews <jmatthe_75503@yahoo.com>; City Manager <citymanager@littlerock.gov> Subject: Awful Party House Zoning Proposal across from Central High - Agenda Item 10 - File No. Z-7965- AA Importance: High CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners and others, I am writing in support of Joyce Matthews, my neighbor, friend and long term resident of 1415 Park Street. I also write in support of our neighborhood association and Central High School to state my strong objections to the application of Hayes Properties Enterprises LLC to convert 1417 S. Park Street into a party house. This letter will: First: Look at why this drastic party house rezoning is such an awful idea for our fragile neighborhood. Second: Urge that the entire failed Planned Office District on Park Street across from Central High be revoked. Third: Present the concept of well regulated short term rentals as a means of encouraging reinvestment, as an alternate use for this property. 1. Commercial Party House Zoning: The applicants have come to the Board with a muddled request for a zoning change that would give them extremely broad leeway to use the home at 1417 S. Park Street to host parties and any other events for up to 60 people. They also want the right to use it without restriction for short term rentals. In this, they propose no clear lines between the party house and short term rental (STR) use. They also do not propose any limits on how many guests can overnight there. Finally, they want to use it themselves as a second home when someone related to the applicant LLC happens to be here. This party house/STR idea would be a bad one for many reasons, even if the owners of the LLC did not live thousands of miles away, and have a long history of making promises they presumably meant sincerely, but clearly cannot keep. The only limit they propose for the party use is from 8 AM to 9 PM. There are no other restrictions. Even this time restriction is illusory, because the applicant is asking for short term overnight rental usage for the home, and has proposed no limits to this. Because alcohol is not prohibited, we have to assume that guests would be able to bring alcohol to the STR, and to serve their own BYOB alcohol at any events. The party can just keep on going. Disturbance and noise is pre-programmed. Our dear senior citizen neighborhood leader, Joyce Matthews, lives a few feet away from the home, and has for decades. She does not want to see a party house next to her. No one would. Principal Rousseau of Central HIgh School, right across the street, does not want see this use either. The house has completely inadequate parking to the proposed intensity of use. While it is the only of the four applicant-owned homes in the area that is in habitable condition (more on that below), it is a fully inadequate structure for this level of commercial use. If the Commission follows staff recommendations, this house could host parties and events any day of the year, all year long, all to profit remote owners, and all to the detriment of both the neighborhood and the school. When Joyce asked the applicant the target market for the events, their representative mentioned college parties. In what world is this a good idea? Certainly not the one I want to live in. The applicants came recently to our neighborhood meeting and presented a plan for small events for up to twenty people, with a small Airbnb in the back of the house. Within a week after making these representations to neighbors, they asked for City approval for a party house for 60 people - with the entire 2000 square foot house usable as a short term rental. This sits very poorly. This party house zoning request needs to be put clearly into the context of the streetscape around it. Between Daisy Bates and 17th Street along the east side of Park Street, there are only two occupied residential homes. All the rest are empty, and most are in seriously declining condition. As one heads south on Park St. from the Magnolia gas station, visitors to Central High see two gutted shells owned by the applicant, one city owned gutted shell and the sadly declining Washington Heritage House. Crossing 16th St., there is then the renovated old Ponders Drug Store on the corner, with one vacant duplex to the east of it and four vacant and decaying buildings to the south - all owned by the same developer. In this small area, of critical importance to the Central HIgh Historic District, there are thus only two occupied and nine vacant homes. Zoning a commercial party house into the middle of this fragile area will help no one, except perhaps the owners. Sadly, as bad as it threatens to be, this proposal is also likely to fail commercially, only more loudly and with more disruption than the applicants’ past failures. When Ms. Blagdon and Dr. McGraw presented their plans in 2005 to the Planning Commission, I expressed my concern about their viability. I was given the clear response that it was not the task of the Commission to consider possible viability. Perhaps it should have been, and should be now. In the City Council testimony in 2006, Ms. Ambrose, then head of the neighborhood association, noted that no viability plan for the POD proposal had been provided. It is not surprising that these projects never got off the ground. There was no viability plan presented for this usage either. As the host of four small Airbnb’s here, I am quite amazed at how much work it takes to keep getting good reviews and good guests - and I live in short walking distance of all my properties. It is extremely difficult, and margins are thin. I do not permit instant booking, and screen and decline many people asking to stay. I cannot imagine what it would be like to rent a house as big as 1417 S. Park, with zoning this loose, from afar. To make this project work financially, I fear that the owners or their managers will not be able to have high standards or screening. Anybody can come, and in large numbers. This party house zoning would be worrisome even if the City vigorously enforced zoning, noise and other rules in this neighborhood. It does not. For example, my complaints about a new unauthorized junk yard on 17th St. between Park and Summit, and a new unauthorized car and truck repair shop (or maybe chop shop) at Marshall and 17th St. have been studiously ignored by Planning for many months. The applicant's collapsing house at 1412 Schiller Street around the corner has not been the object of effective code enforcement for the 18 years I have been here. Now with corporate, out of state ownership, the responsible parties will be even more unreachable, than when the truly delightful Grace Blagdon spent hours on the porch of her private house museum at 1417 Park, always ready for a chat. Lack of effective legal enforcement by city agencies and courts is my daily reality as a resident and investor in the Central High area. That’s not the way it’s supposed to be, but it’s the way it is. Given this, I am especially opposed to blank check commercial zoning near me. If the Commission opts to support this hare-brained idea, the City would once again prove its lack of interest in protecting poorer neighborhoods, and its lack of concern about fostering an improved investment climate here in the “donut hole”, created over decades by bad city policies and worse enforcement. It’s a shame. In this case, an easily avoidable one. Please do not let it happen. Overrule the staff recommendations, and do not bring this needless little plague to our struggling streets. POD Revocation: While the City’s action to stop this awful plan would help, it is not sufficient to provide a real basis for neighborhood renewal. The fact that this terrible idea has gotten as far as it has, seems to be based in large part on the precedent of prior zoning action taken by the Planning Commission and the City. When Planning Staff looked at the zoning around this home, they seemed to reach the conclusion that the zoning is such a mess that adding party house spot rezoning to the pile might not make much difference. This conclusion is wrong, but understandable. Planning Department staff has a great deal on their plate, and cannot be as aware as neighbors of what is happening - or not - on the ground. Had staff had time to research the request in detail, instead of recommending approval for this proposed Planned Commercial District (PCD) as a change from a Planned Office District (POD), they should have recognized that the POD ought long ago have lapsed, and moved to restore this property to single family residential zoning. Starting from the proper zoning, this commercial party house idea can be seen more clearly for how extreme and potentially destructive it is. The entire POD should be revoked for two reasons. First, Ordinance # 19,472 approving the POD clearly states in Section 2 that the POD Zoning “is approved for the current owners of the property and is not transferable to any future owners of the property.” Section 2 provides that a property ownership change would automatically cause the property to be restored to residential zoning. In 2017, Grace Blagdon and her daughter conveyed this property (plus the other two she owned that were subject to the ordinance, and the ruin on Schiller St.) to Hayes Properties Enterprises LLC. This conveyance alone should have voided the zoning. The staff review does not show that this was considered. It should have been. Second, and more importantly, the zoning change was contingent on Ms. Blagdon and Dr. McGraw honoring the conditions of the ordinance. They have not. When the Board of Directors approved of the Park Street rezoning in January 2006, Ms. Blagdon and Dr. McGraw gained support by presenting enticing ideas for a community-oriented renovation and use of their four houses. Their goal, for three of the four houses, was to use their location across from Little Rock Central High School to focus on education and culture. They committed to renovating these historic homes in line with National Park Service standards, and represented to the City Council in January 2006 that they planned to complete their tasks by August 2007. Their approved uses could have strengthened the whole presence of the National Historic Site, had they ever been realized. According to the applicant representative's presentation to the City Board, 1411 S. Park Street was to be an art space; 1417 S. Park an educational think tank; 1421 S. Park the gathering place and 1501 S. Park a bed and breakfast. Planning Staff (which, along with the neighborhood association did not support the POD proposal) noted in their report that the uses proposed were quasi-public. The only use that had the potential to make money was the bed and breakfast - but even that would likely have lost money, given the commitment made to have a full time caretaker living on site. All other uses, including the “think tank” use approved for 1417 S. Park, were not intended to make money. The plan seemed well meaning. It was sold hard by the applicants who lobbied very heavily for it, but was never to be. Sixteen years after the zoning change was authorized, the would-be art gallery and bed and breakfast now belonging to the LLC are both gutted shells, as they have been for many years. Dr. McGraw used her house for the occasional reading and lecture, but it was never renovated, has not been used for years, and is decaying badly. 1417 S. Park was renovated and furnished, but was barely used, has not been inhabited for years and was never a “research center” benefitting the community. Like all of us, neither Ms. Blagdon nor Dr. McGraw have grown younger in the intervening years. Neither are in a position to manage these properties as they need. How much longer can the City ignore that this whole POD has failed entirely and should be revoked? Shouldn’t sixteen years of failure be enough? Or is eternal failure preprogrammed and irrevocable, as seemed to the position of Planning Department staff, who told me that the applicants only had to start the project within three years, even a minimal start like painting - and then were subject to no deadline whatsoever to complete. This makes no sense and is terrible policy, if that indeed is the case. The presence of this zoning is dangerous and destabilizing, as so clearly demonstrated by the current application. The four historic homes in the PUD should, as far as possible, be brought back to what they were - lovely homes. Having zoning support, rather than undermine, this goal is not too much to ask. Short Term Rental Possibility As a final note, I would like to suggest that the applicant might return to the Planning Department with an entirely different plan. Rather than proposing 1417 as one large party house/short term rental, I would suggest that they propose rezoning the property as a duplex, with one large long term and one smaller short term rental unit. The STR should be be subject to clear rules for occupancy limits, noise and visitors, so that party house use could lead to revocation of the duplex status, and a block on STR use by this remote corporate owner. This has long been and remains a difficult area to make the numbers work to justify the huge reinvestments needed to bring vacant houses back. We want to have people in our neighborhood, not just empty shells, like the three dilapidated homes owned by the applicant. As a way to encourage needed reinvestment, simplified, structured STR licensing could provide a pathway to bring vacant houses back into productive use. We have and continue to lose too many historic homes. Unless real investors can be enticed to put the real money in to bring houses back, the tide of destruction will remain very difficult to turn back. I have be trying to do so since early 2004, and am now starting the historic rehabilitation of my eighteenth historic house in this wonderful, struggling neighborhood. All were vacant when purchased, many were unsafe. I know whereof I speak. Please do not kick our neighborhood further down, by granting this unusual zoning privilege to such a problematic applicant. Thank you for your consideration. Paul Dodds Managing Director Urban Frontier LLC 2119 W. 17th Street Little Rock 72202 www.urbanfrontier.org 501 791 4135 From: Denise L [mailto:dannleeson@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 8:37 PM To: Moore, Monte <MMoore@littlerock.gov>; Thrower, Torrence <tthrower@littlerock.gov>; Collins, Gilbert <gcollins@littlerock.gov>; wordsmithlr <wordsmithlr@gmail.com>; Rousseau, Nancy <Nancy.Rousseau@lrsd.org>; Miller Jr., Virgil <vmiller@littlerock.gov>; joyce matthews <jmatthe_75503@yahoo.com>; City Manager <citymanager@littlerock.gov>; derickbrooks01@gmail.com; bettonclinic@aol.com <bettonclinic@aol.com>; cheatham.wil@gmail.com <cheatham.wil@gmail.com>; kathodgesesq@gmail.com <kathodgesesq@gmail.com>; todd.hart@baptist-health.org <todd.hart@baptist-health.org>; mhaynes@21cjs.com <mhaynes@21cjs.com>; platture@yahoo.com <platture@yahoo.com>; rochelle17usa@gmail.com <rochelle17usa@gmail.com>; ArkRealEstate@aol.com <ArkRealEstate@aol.com>; vickerscap@gmail.com <vickerscap@gmail.com>; ravogeljr@gmail.com <ravogeljr@gmail.com>; derickbrooks01@gmail.com; bettonclinic@aol.com <bettonclinic@aol.com>; cheatham.wil@gmail.com <cheatham.wil@gmail.com>; kathodgesesq@gmail.com <kathodgesesq@gmail.com>; todd.hart@baptist-health.org <todd.hart@baptist-health.org>; mhaynes@21cjs.com <mhaynes@21cjs.com>; platture@yahoo.com <platture@yahoo.com>; rochelle17usa@gmail.com <rochelle17usa@gmail.com>; ArkRealEstate@aol.com <ArkRealEstate@aol.com>; vickerscap@gmail.com <vickerscap@gmail.com>; ravogeljr@gmail.com <ravogeljr@gmail.com> Cc: Moore, Monte <MMoore@littlerock.gov>; Thrower, Torrence <tthrower@littlerock.gov>; Collins, Gilbert <gcollins@littlerock.gov>; Rousseau, Nancy <Nancy.Rousseau@lrsd.org>; Miller Jr., Virgil <vmiller@littlerock.gov>; joyce matthews <jmatthe_75503@yahoo.com>; City Manager <citymanager@littlerock.gov>; kathy wells <wordsmithlr@gmail.com>; Arlene Rose <arose_72202@yahoo.com>; Bobby Mathews <bcmathews84@gmail.com>; Chester Guydon <cguydon@att.net>; ryrunner@yahoo.com Subject: Neighborhood objections - 1417 S. Park St. rezoning application CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners, Staff, and Others, As President of the Central High Neighborhood, Inc (CHNI) (neighborhood association), I submit for your consideration a letter conveying the unanimous request by out directors and officers to deny the pending application from Hayes Properties Enterprises for a proposed planned commercial development at 1417 S. Park Street. Our neighborhood is dear to us. While we want and work for our neighborhood to prosper and develop, we will not willingly sacrifice quality of life. For this general reason, we stand firm in our request that you deny the pending application from Hayes Properties Enterprises for 1417 S. Park Street. First, the applicant, Trishmonisha Blagdon, and her agent, Kwendeche, joined our October 12th (monthly) CHNI meeting to discuss the project. They described an event center for 20 guests and a one-bedroom short-term rental. As the project seemed to lack firm details, we requested they send more information before submitting their proposal to the Commission. They have yet to send additional information. The Information Sheet for Subdivision, PZD’s, Zoning…Site Plan Reviews is dated October 18th. Your division’s Staff Report was likely prepared from this document and the cover letters provided by the applicant and her agent. The Staff Report indicates the maximum anticipated guests at 60 persons. In addition, the application and Staff Report indicate an intent to list the whole facility for short-term rental, i.e. Air BnB. The intent expressed in the application is in direct conflict with the intent conveyed to CHNI membership only six days earlier. Either the applicant has no clear plan for this enterprise or she misrepresented her intent in order to gain neighborhood support for the project. Either scenario is a misguided way of going about starting a business. As Commissioners are aware, in 2006, 1417 S. Park and three other properties were rezoned from R-3, R-4 to POC. While some of the intended actions were carried out, others were not. For the last approximate eight years, 1417 S. Park has remained vacant. The other two properties owned by the applicant remain gutted shells in very poor repair, sixteen years after they told the neighborhood and the city that they would be renovated under National Park Service guidelines by August 2007. We present the following table to illustrate that the applicants have a history of failing to follow through with their intentions. Performance Intent No All properties - Upgrade driveway aprons & rebuild driveways consistent w/historical period of house No All properties - Side yard will have new 6’ wood plank fencing No All properties - Handicap accessibility from the rear No 1417 S. Park – “…large public space for program seminars, office space w/computer stations, reception, waiting area, and private offices…” No 1417 S. Park - ”…screening would be required along the perimeter of the site where abutting residential or residentially zoned property.” Staff also required plantings adjacent to the screening fence. We are dismayed that Planning staff apparently failed to consider the applicant’s history of being unable or unwilling to keep promises made to the city and the neighborhood, before recommending a major and very invasive expansion of use for a spot re-zoning of the only house where the applicant has made any reinvestment, while seriously and simultaneously neglecting three others. As Commissioners will note from the application, Hayes Properties Enterprises is based out of California. The absentee owner will contract with local businesses to care for the property and carry out their business. While the applicant asserts the target audience is historical tourists, the applicant’s agent shared that college parties will be targeted. The CHNI Board rejects the idea that this business model of an absentee owner of a party house is a “good fit” for our neighborhood. Objections stated in the 2006 Staff Report remain valid for the current application for re-zoning. We are concerned about trash, noise, and light pollution, parking challenges, and increased crime. We urgently ask that you take into consideration the needs and desires of the residents of the Central High neighborhood, especially those who own abutting properties or those on the same block. Each and every day, these families experience the pleasure or the dread of dealing with the results of your decisions. Thank you for your support. Denise Leeson President, CHNI Sent from Mail for Windows From: Bobby Mathews [mailto:bcmathews84@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 8, 2021 7:28 AM To: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Meeting re: File N. Z-7965-A, Hayes Properties Enterprises LLC CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Sir or Madam, I would like to participate in the December 9 Planning Board meeting. Please send a WebEx invitation for live interactive video participation to me at bcmathews84@gmail.com My phone number for texting is 870 476 2548 I am interested in Agenda Item #10, File N. Z-7965-A, Hayes Properties Enterprises LLC I am against the item I plan to speak. Any mailings after the meeting can also be sent to my residence 1422 Summit St, Little Rock, 72202. Thank you.