title
Minutes for the Land Use Advisory Committee meeting on March 20, 2014
body
Members present: James Dunivan, Terry Bare, Mark Enos, Carroll Caldwell, Todd Burton and Pam Alexander
Members absent: Shawnie Carrier, Kevan Inboden, Bill Hall, Darren May, Don Parker, Eric Scarbrough, Faye McCall, Jerry Halsey, Jr., Dr. Jim Sanders, Joe Tomlinson, Mark Hogue, Nadine Straitt and Wixson Huffstetler
Dr. Marsha Guffey, MPO Director, gave a PowerPoint presentation discussing the Land Use Plan Advisory Committee and what the committee has done in past meetings (see attached). She explained Mayor Perrin has indicated that he would like to keep the Land Use Plan and the Master Street Plan current, so they’ve been asked to review the Land Use Plan and make changes if needed. She suggested having a 20-year planning horizon for the plan, but that can be finalized at a later meeting. She also recommended looking at growth boundaries to ensure the city doesn’t annex in more territory than it can handle.
Dr. Guffey also noted the committee needs to discuss a flood plains development policy because so many sources recommend limiting development in the flood plain. Mr. Bare stated one problem with the flood plain issue is that the city agreed to not have more stringent rules than FEMA. FEMA allows development in flood zones, so the city allows development as long as it’s under certain criteria, such as being one foot above the 100-year flood zone. Those regulations are in the city’s Storm Water Management Plan. He questioned with that being known, how the city would restrict development in the flood plain. Dr. Guffey noted she did not know about those regulations and would talk with City Engineer Craig Light about them.
Dr. Guffey further explained one of the reasons for the revision of the 2009 Land Use Plan is because it had a lot of categories and cities don’t typically have as many as that plan included. She added it looked more like a zoning map rather than a Land Use Map.
Dr. Guffey stated Jim von Tungeln, an Arkansas planner, recommended growth sectors for the city. She discussed the type of planning he recommended and provided the committee with an article from Cities & Towns magazine (see attached) that discussed comprehensive plans and their pros and cons. He indicated that the growth sectors should be based on suitability analysis, density, surrounding areas, things such as that. She explained they were able to come up with a zoning chart (see attached) that was a mix of their recommendations and Mr. von Tungeln’s. She noted Jonesboro does not have an adopted comprehensive plan since the Vision 2030 Plan was not formally adopted by the City Council. She added in lieu of having a functional comprehensive plan, the next plan in line would be the Land Use Plan.
Mr. Burton referred to the zoning chart and questioned how that would help with issues that may arise with zoning at the City Council level. Dr. Guffey explained moving to something like that chart would make things more permissive because zoning would be more flexible. A more flexible process will help developers and could also help with traffic issues, which is an issue that is brought up a lot. Mr. Caldwell stated that, as a developer, the zoning chart would be very helpful because it would tell him right away what could and couldn’t be done with a piece of property. He noted it would also tell the citizens what can and can’t go in their neighborhoods.
Ms. Alexander questioned whether they could get more description concerning the zonings in the zoning chart. Dr. Guffey explained the handout with the growth sectors (see attached) will further discuss some of the zonings on the chart. She noted that once the Land Use Plan and the Master Street Plan are completed, they will then go and fit the zonings to correspond to the plans to reduce inconsistencies.
Discussion was then held regarding how the zoning chart would’ve been applicable the recent Casey’s General Store rezoning request that went before the MAPC and City Council and received a lot of opposition from those in the surrounding area. The Council postponed the request indefinitely. Mr. Enos expressed concern that if the city had a zoning chart like the one provided to the committee, that could possibly limit the input by citizens because the neighborhood would have less of a say as to what is developed on property, as long as the development is within the guidelines on the chart. Mr. Caldwell stated the chart wouldn’t have changed that particular case because the applicants would have still had to go to the Council and MAPC for approval due to the additional piece of property that was involved. City Planner Otis Spriggs explained the applicant would have still had to apply for the conditional use of the property. He recommended having compatibility standards along with the zoning chart in order to help with those types of issues, such as commercial next to residential or traffic studies for some developments. He also noted that the zoning chart would only be applicable to future rezoning requests. Ms. Alexander agreed with Mr. Spriggs, questioning how they would account for noise, smell and lights, among other things that could affect the neighborhood. Further discussion was held concerning the Casey’s General Store rezoning request.
Discussion was then held regarding the old Land Use map. Mr. Spriggs explained one problem with the old Land Use Map is they used just the tools that were available to them at that time in order to come up with the map. He stated more thought needs to be put into the Land Use Map because, in retrospect, it the Land Use Map is very similar to the zoning map. Mr. Bare added he would like to look into redevelopment more in order to make that easier to do.
Dr. Guffey then discussed the proposed Growth Sectors Map. She explained the high intensity areas would be along major transportation arteries and are typically already commercial areas. The medium intensity is intended to be a mix of some multi-family with some limits and commercial, with limits on how it looks. They also considered average daily traffic counts when deciding which areas should go where on the map. They did not discuss redevelopment, but will consider it after other issues are discussed.
Dr. Guffey asked the committee to review all of the handouts that she provided and decide which way the committee members would like to go - whether they should go back to a certain point or redo it, whether the plan should be permissive or not, etc. Mr. Enos asked if there are other types of Land Use maps that they could implement. Dr. Guffey answered yes, but due to enforcement issues she suggested things be tighter. She noted communities are leaning more towards flexibility these days.
Discussion was held concerning apartments. Mr. Caldwell stated that the best control is the zoning chart that the committee was provided.
After no further business, the committee adjourned at 4:53 p.m.