[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6196035,"mediaKeyId","3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2","parentId",3858292,"title","Little Rock board denies two special‑use permits for sober‑living homes after neighbors cite traffic, density and safety concerns","audioSeconds",3927,"startMs",828000,"endMs",4755000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2&start=828&end=4755","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2/thumbnail_828000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6196035/Little-Rock-City/Pulaski-County/Arkansas/Little-Rock-board-denies-two-specialuse-permits-for-soberliving-homes-after-neighbors-cite-traffic-density-and-safety-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6196035-72b58070bb3c811ad852aa46cc0c369b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771218741&Signature=lBUSSBKsFgRiInSAaqEgO4nHT2v4LGnMmbapBUyaOosHqOClk~nH3~8wQ~fx~ZOiqOP~XD7QSe28lzoeWvJqCpivKqNXZHRNvlhD~dY5aZusOpnLavTyaQA9GWZLiUoIIJa25ZgKpnry0SySG5Tkr43yG6lp50yebcn2p3XVMESwob9Xx10aDccMHs2UW5XQLo1e0HXXjacFEjPs1kRZhWT84gYwB2r6yY5~k15Of749nsZHtbDRDZ3UvDEojWYdHHs6TENhmr4x-QtMW4vDL05FTAHREKXVMZzv4QhwpZ6n80yq2widofLMsqRNOGdg-z6euBqKPUVK8XyKzcl-Sw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Little Rock","date","2025-06-17T22:55:22Z","article","The Little Rock City Board of Directors on June 17 denied two special‑use permit requests to allow group homes in single‑family zones in Hillcrest, rejecting applications for 205 North Woodrow Street and 822 North Monroe Street after extended public comment and legal argument.

Neighbors and neighborhood groups told the board the homes would worsen heavy morning and afternoon bus traffic near the Arkansas School for the Blind and Deaf, add on‑street parking pressure on narrow streets that allow parking on only one side, and change long‑standing single‑family patterns. Supporters, including current and former residents and recovery‑sector advocates, said the homes provide essential post‑treatment housing and meet national supportive‑recovery standards.

The vote followed a public hearing that drew dozens of speakers from both sides. Residents near Woodrow focused on morning rush‑hour school‑bus movements and alley conditions behind the block; several said they had lodged prior complaints to planning staff and code enforcement and that the planning commission originally recommended denial. Supporters described the homes as structured living environments that help people maintain recovery and rejoin the workforce.

“I owe my life to Sunlight,” said Nicholas Abernathy, who identified himself as speaking on behalf of Sunlight Sober Living. “It’s given me a sense of family… I still work in Hillcrest now.” Justin Buck, executive director of the Wolf Street Foundation and vice chair of the Arkansas Alliance for Recovery Residences, told the board he had inspected both houses and that “they far exceed the national standards that are set by the National Alliance for Recovery Residences.”

Residents and neighborhood leaders urged a denial. “We ask that you deny this special use permit,” said Elena Wills, who said she and more than 30 neighbors had signed a petition opposing the permit for the Woodrow property. Wills told the board she had documented about 10 school buses using North Woodrow Street during morning drop‑off and again in the afternoon and that the street is also used by the school to train students who are blind or visually impaired.

Attorney David Parker, representing Hillcrest Homes (the owner group identified in the hearings), told the board the organization had purchased neighboring houses as contingency space and that, if the special‑use permit were denied, the operator would instead place up to four unrelated adults in each of the three nearby houses to comply with the city’s unrelated‑occupant rules. Parker said the Woodrow property is a large house (about 5,000 square feet) and that the operator had provided a traffic study and additional off‑street parking in response to concerns.

Board members debated the factual record and process. Director Webb said she was troubled by the applicant’s failure to reach out to neighbors earlier and by the revelation that adjacent houses had been purchased as backups. Director Webb said she believed 11 residents were too many for one single‑family lot. After discussion, the board voted and the motion to approve the Woodrow special‑use permit failed. Later, following a similar hearing on the Monroe property, the board also voted against that permit.

Actions and outcomes
- 205 North Woodrow Street — special‑use permit to allow a group home with up to 11 residents in an R‑3 district: application denied (board vote recorded as “Nays have it” in meeting minutes). Motion text in agenda: “An ordinance granting a special use permit for property located at 205 North Woodrow Street… approving a group home in the R‑3 District.” (Outcome: failed; vote tally not specified in the audible roll call at the time of vote.)

- 822 North Monroe Street — special‑use permit to allow a group home with up to 8 residents in an R‑2 district: application denied (board vote recorded as “Nays have it”). Motion text in agenda: “An ordinance granting a special use permit for property located at 822 North Monroe Street… approving a group home in the R‑2 District.” (Outcome: failed; vote tally not specified in the audible roll call at the time of vote.)

What proponents and opponents argued
- Supporters: multiple former residents and recovery‑sector representatives said the homes follow national recovery‑residence standards, offer supportive programming, and reduce pressure on emergency medical services. Justin Buck said the properties “far exceed the national standards” and emphasized the supportive elements beyond shared housing.

- Opponents: neighbors, the Hillcrest Residents Association and the Coalition of Little Rock Neighborhoods cited parking strain, narrow alleys and the proximity of school buses and students at the Arkansas School for the Blind and Deaf. Elena Wills and others provided photos and letters documenting bus activity and alley condition. Pittman Ware, president of the Hillcrest Residents Association, said the applications had been operated years before permits were sought and that the scale (11 and 8 residents) would “disrupt long established patterns of single‑family homes.”

Board direction and next steps
The board heard the appeals and exercised its authority to deny both special‑use permit applications. The applicant’s attorneys indicated the operator could instead house residents spread across multiple contiguous properties in compliance with the city code on unrelated occupants (placing up to four unrelated adults per house), which opponents said would preserve density while moving the same number of residents into the neighborhood. The record shows no immediate direction to staff for further study; the denials stand as the board’s formal action from the meeting.

Why it matters
The decisions illustrate tensions between neighborhood character and expansion of recovery housing in Little Rock. Board members cited both process concerns — including neighborhood engagement and timing of staff recommendations — and land‑use impacts such as on‑street parking, alley access, and student safety near specialized schools. Operators and recovery advocates argued denial reduces a scarce resource in the recovery continuum.

Ending note
The two denials followed several hours of testimony and legal argument. The applicant has indicated alternate configurations that would comply with the city’s unrelated‑occupant limits; neighbors said they would continue to press zoning and enforcement concerns if such steps were taken.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Little Rock Board of Directors Meeting 6.17.25","oneSentenceSummary","The Little Rock City Board of Directors on June 17 denied two special‑use permit applications to allow group homes in Hillcrest — 205 North Woodrow Street (11 residents requested) and 822 North Monroe Street (8 residents requested) — after extended public testimony and legal argument about parking, traffic and neighborhood character.","taxTitle","Little Rock City, Pulaski County, Arkansas","taxId",3741,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6196025,"After months of debate and a veto attempt, Little Rock board appoints Delphon Hubbard as city manager following executive session",6368,6793000,13161000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2&start=6793&end=13161","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2/thumbnail_6793000.jpg","/articles/6196025/Little-Rock-City/Pulaski-County/Arkansas/After-months-of-debate-and-a-veto-attempt-Little-Rock-board-appoints-Delphon-Hubbard-as-city-manager-following-executive-session","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6196025-e4391871a9cde11d42d34d37d11f8a79/orig.mp4?Expires=1771218741&Signature=CKRIfDouHeMnUkIfvOUMKRIoqSW1WtloX47dBAttjKIbfEr8re7XrRIZ-y8TuTPQNLhp6g7YTHG1WC9LFczXEupF3aptbnOWmu38Oz0oywTZPGtovo0Ild2RvYxPUaYvCx6GF4gA12pT31ugSnT5f6BkzIH1H9-KExgUDTNWWdpx5bLBR2NGxAqBlPcbBh6cV-E57pE3gkiyP4bP-h3S3-B3hcmckrVldau51Zw2UFRb~WZPU8ZkUw6DxzVqiSql421oS4DIPqM7ePcP4kgnMQ0ghsx~0Xn4UKjITE~tAMTAxQQwjTDi1LjI9PqMRqDN~uDzLlCW1h79wMVxF4PA-g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Little Rock City Board of Directors on June 17 rejected a board resolution proposing a committee‑based selection process for the city manager, and later, after an executive session, appointed Delphon Hubbard as city manager by a 7–1 vote.

The board first debated Resolution 20, which would have established a three‑member board committee to review city manager applicants and deliver finalists to the mayor for nomination. Vice Mayor Weirich and other members said the step would increase transparency; opponents said it conflicted with the city charter approved by voters in 2007, which reserves nomination power to the mayor with board confirmation. The board voted the resolution down in a voice/roll call vote, and the mayor issued a veto on the matter during the meeting.

Public commenters spoke on both sides of the selection‑process question. Junie Matheny urged a committee to give citizens a voice in the selection of a high‑paid city executive. Scott Hamilton said the 2007 ordinance clearly gives the mayor nomination authority and opposed changing the process. Director Miller likewise cited the 2007 voter‑approved structure and said she would not support the change.

After the regular agenda, the board entered an executive session. On returning from closed session the board voted to appoint Delphon Hubbard (noted in the record as Chief Delphon Hubbard) to the city manager role; the roll call showed seven votes in favor and one vote against (Director Hines). The mayor announced the 7–1 vote and the board adjourned.

Actions and outcomes
- Resolution 20 — a board resolution to establish a three‑member selection procedure for the city manager: board vote failed (voice/roll‑call; motion did not carry); the mayor issued a veto on the proposed resolution.

- Appointment of Delphon Hubbard to city manager: board voted in executive session and then publicly recorded the result — 7 in favor, 1 opposed (Director Hines); outcome: approved.

Why it matters
The sequence underscores an ongoing governance dispute over the appropriate role of the mayor and board in selecting the city’s chief executive. Voters in 2007 established the mayoral nomination/board confirmation process that some board members and members of the public said should remain intact; others advocated more direct board involvement before nomination. The board’s final action put a permanent city manager in place and closed a long vacancy the mayor said had lasted more than a year and a half.

Ending note
The board’s public record reflects the failed procedural resolution, the mayor’s veto and a final 7–1 confirmation of Delphon Hubbard after executive session. The city will publish the formal appointment paperwork and start transition steps per city personnel and administrative rules.","The board debated a proposed resolution to change the city‑manager selection process, rejected that resolution, accepted a mayoral veto and then—after an executive session—voted 7–1 to appoint Chief Delphon Hubbard as city manager.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6196030,"Little Rock board approves multiple contracts, zoning items and demolitions; consent agenda includes $8.45 million in special projects",235,425000,660000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2&start=425&end=660","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3858292-8e05d12d505312baaa1c6e0212f933a2/thumbnail_425000.jpg","/articles/6196030/Little-Rock-City/Pulaski-County/Arkansas/Little-Rock-board-approves-multiple-contracts-zoning-items-and-demolitions-consent-agenda-includes-845-million-in-special-projects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6196030-eca847ef5d15e2c9f510adc2f20173e7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771218741&Signature=gQFc5DHgtLy~78BWkjD8IDY0hXyKRt7apFb~CS~DToaSnWetHUtDxMRmuXs5CuAEaD2X~brkJt9XcTUmWPiOxvRITpOfAff8pP4pthWQzMYbQLK0o1D4zhCXwheATWxpMs7nuA9YyWBNggpusR87NAQ5fAsB47VMsO3zAWY5GKvIiLUuXLWHMWLGkbkL8BKRRwH-bACZkyUot2ibwVIhakJWjZaTcpS4sFAL2awJVGdou7yHjZDYiCa-EVHIueFjbwSGZG93guRZpDsCCmDXESL2paxkZuCVPUEAkWRqV8bFeBNjf1KIABx24vnpVLdZr2Bs9OFKuB14wPYOazCbnQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Little Rock City Board of Directors on June 17 approved a multi‑item consent agenda and several ordinances on second and third readings, authorizing construction contracts, insurance renewals, facility repairs and zoning actions.

Key approvals on the consent agenda and in subsequent readings included contracts for public‑works projects, a property‑insurance renewal and a $8.45 million allocation from excess fund balance for special projects. The board also approved two municipal property owner multipurpose improvement districts (Mountain Brook MPID numbers 2025‑001 and 2025‑002), a planned district commercial rezoning for 1724 Rice Street (Lawcraft Duplex SCR‑222‑PDC), abandonment and demolition of three dangerous unoccupied residential structures, and an annexation ordinance to zone certain lands I‑3 (heavy industrial).

Major consent agenda contract approvals (authorized via single consent vote)
- Wagner General Contractors Inc.: Indian Trail sidewalk improvement — contract amount not to exceed $1,110,769.20 (funded from limited tax obligation capital improvement bonds).
- Bulls Construction Inc.: Canis Road and Cooper Orbit intersection improvement — contract amount not to exceed $966,856.20 (funded from limited tax obligation capital improvement bonds).
- Positive Result Lawn Services Inc.: Teton Forest drainage improvement — contract amount not to exceed $148,800 (limited tax general obligation capital improvement bonds).
- Janitorial Doctors Inc.: one‑year contract extension for mowing contracts #1520 and #1521 — amount not to exceed $147,310 plus applicable taxes and fees for park mowing and grounds maintenance.
- Cromwell Architects Engineers Inc.: park facilities inventory and planning proposal — $70,000 plus $20,000 contingency.
- McClellan Consulting Engineers Inc.: engineering services for Robson Golf Course hole #13 repair/redesign — contract not to exceed $80,000 plus applicable taxes and a potential 5% contingency.
- Safety National Casualty Corp.: one‑year excess workers’ compensation insurance — not to exceed $248,970 plus taxes and fees.
- Risk Management Resources: three‑month third‑party administration extension for self‑funded workers’ compensation program — not to exceed $18,000 plus taxes and fees (06/30/2025–09/28/2025).
- Simmons Martin Emergency Group LLC: repair and replacement of ladder fly section on Little Rock Fire Department ladder truck — not to exceed $109,529.80.
- Travelers Insurance Co.: city property insurance renewal — not to exceed $2,344,136 for 07/01/2025–06/30/2026.

Other agenda items and outcomes
- The board set July 1 as the date of hearing to consider abandonment of a portion of East Sixth Street right‑of‑way.
- The board approved an amendment to the CDBG/HOPWA uses and sources in the city’s annual plan for 2025 (federal funds amendment) and approved a settlement of federal litigation (details in closed agenda; item referenced on consent).
- Two municipal property owners multipurpose improvement districts were established (Mountain Brook MPID 2025‑001 and 2025‑002); both ordinances carried emergency clauses and were approved on final reading.
- Lawcraft Duplex (SCR‑222 PDC) zoning: the board approved a planned district commercial rezoning for 1724 Rice Street on third and final reading.
- Dangerous structures: the board approved abandonment and demolition of three dangerous unoccupied residential structures as public safety hazards (third and final reading).
- Annexation and zoning to I‑3 heavy industrial: the board approved the annexation ordinance and I‑3 zoning on third and final reading.

Votes and process notes
Most items on the consent agenda passed by voice vote recorded as “Ayes have it.” Multiple ordinances were placed on second and third reading under suspended rules and were adopted following the standard three‑reading process. The municipal improvement district ordinances included emergency clauses and were approved by the board.

Why it matters
The contracts fund near‑term capital work on sidewalks, intersections and drainage, and the insurance renewals preserve coverage for city assets. The CFO’s $8.45 million allocation from excess fund balance to special projects signals near‑term city spending priorities. The zoning and demolition votes will permit property rehabilitation or removal of blighted structures and add a planned duplex project to the city’s housing stock.

Ending note
Board minutes and adopted ordinances provide the official contract amounts and legal texts for each action; staff will administer contracts and return to the board or post procurement awards as required by city procurement rules.","The City Board approved a broad consent agenda of capital contracts, insurance renewals and planning ordinances on June 17, including construction contracts for sidewalk and intersection improvements, property‑insurance renewal and allocation of $8.45 million from excess fund balance for special projects.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Little Rock board denies two special‑use permits for sober‑living homes after neighbors cite traffic, density and safety concerns

After months of debate and a veto attempt, Little Rock board appoints Delphon Hubbard as city manager following executive session

Little Rock board approves multiple contracts, zoning items and demolitions; consent agenda includes $8.45 million in special projects