Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes for S-1844-F 041824April 11, 2024 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-1844-F STAFF UPDATE: (FEBRUARY 8, 2024) On November 9, 2023, the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the Copper Run Phases 7 and 8 – Preliminary Plat. The Commission voted 3 ayes, 4 nays, 2 abstentions, 1 absent and 1 open position to deny the application. Section 31-94(i) of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance reads as follows: “(1) Reasons for denial of an application by the planning commission shall be placed in writing and mailed to the applicant within five (5) days from the public hearing on such application. Within thirty (30) days of the commission action, a denied application may be resubmitted to the staff for review of the required modifications and resubmission to the planning commission. The failure to resubmit an application within the prescribed period of time shall invoke procedures required for the filing of a new application.” On December 6, 2023 the applicant submitted an e-mail, including a revised/updated preliminary plat document, requesting resubmission to the Planning Commission. Additional information submitted by the applicant’s attorney, Don A. Eilbott, is as follows: “A new, significantly revised application has been submitted. There were three issues that presented at the prior meeting. We believe we have addressed and resolved each. 1) Issue – Would Mr. Hearnsberger’s adjacent property become land locked with the approval of this application? Response – We have discussed with Mr. Hearnsberger and have reached an agreement to allow proper access to his property. The access points are shown on our amended plat and application. Mr. Hearnsberger, to our knowledge, is satisfied and will not object or raise issues. 2) Issue – Sewer Improvement District 239 claims the City should not approve this application until 239 has resolution as to whether it is entitled to tie-on-fees. Response – The issue has been resolved through language that is the same as the language as part of the approved Copper Run Phase 6. The applicant has an appeal pending to the Arkansas Court of Appeals, a bank issued irrevocable letter of credit posted for the entire amount of the judgment, and the City has the right to decline to issue building permits if we do not resolve with 239. There is no possible scenario where 239 is not get properly compensated, if entitled. The affirming of the Circuit Court decision would also be a confirmation of the Circuit Court’s amount of tie-on fee per lot. April 11, 2024 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1844-F 2 3) Issue – Does approval of our application, a) alter or amend the Master Street Plan and; b) if so, does that require approval by the Board of Directors? Response – We are following the guidelines and street placement given by Little Rock Planning and Development as we did with the approved Phase 6. We are requesting that any approval motion contain the following language: Approval as outlined in the “Staff Analysis,” subject to the approval, if required, by the Board of Directors of the Plat to the extent that same alters or amends the Master Street Plan of the City of Little Rock. This resolves both issues. It renders moot the question of whether the Planning Commission is or is not attempting to improperly amend the Master Street Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 8, 2024) The applicant requested a deferral to the March 14, 2024 Agenda. There was a motion to defer the application to the March 14, 2024 Agenda. The motion was seconded. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred to the March 14, 2024 Planning Commission Agenda. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 14, 2024) The item was deferred to the April 11, 2024 agenda, as the applicant failed to notify the surrounding property owners. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 11, 2024) This item was withdrawn, without prejudice at the request of the applicant.