Conway planning commission approves rezoning, conditional-use request for three-lot site on Conway Boulevard

The Conway Planning Commission on Sept. 15 voted to recommend rezoning three adjoining vacant lots at 124, 130 and 136 Conway Boulevard from S‑1 (institutional) to R‑2A (two‑family residential) and approved a conditional‑use permit to allow up to 12 dwelling units per acre, with 13 conditions imposed by staff.

Lauren, city planning staff, told the commission the three lots together total just over an acre and carry the city’s old Conway design historic overlay. She said, “As proposed off the conditional use permit, 86 trips for 12 units would be, what would be proposed throughout a typical weekday. The current traffic counts along Conway Boulevard just to the south are 1,800, trips a day.”

The request included two linked actions: the rezoning to R‑2A and a conditional‑use permit (CUP) that would allow development at a density up to 12 dwelling units per acre. Lauren emphasized the CUP is a request for “up to 12” units and cautioned approval would not guarantee 12 units on the finished site. “When we get to site development review, they may have to lose a structure to accommodate drainage,” she told the commission, adding that site development and the Historic District Commission (HDC) review would shape final lot coverage, building placement and design.

Bobby French, the applicant’s representative, told the panel the owner plans townhome‑style, craftsman buildings and that the project team understands “there are a few challenges on this that they’ll have to work through, like the 20 foot, you know, instead of 10 feet and stuff like that.” Several nearby residents and property owners spoke during the public hearing, expressing concerns about density, design and drainage.

David Antonio, a resident at 1423 Garvin Street, said the neighborhood is largely single‑family and that neighbors were opposed to large multifamily structures directly behind their homes: “We just personally, my family, me and my wife, we just don’t want multi density right behind us.” John Parrack, owner of Stonegate Apartments, said, “My concern is related to the density of it, 12 units in essentially 1 acre, and also design and drainage,” and noted proximity and potential drainage impacts on his property.

Staff responded that drainage and engineering would be reviewed during site development review and by the city engineer, and that HDC would review and set design standards because the site sits within an overlay. Lauren read the 13 proposed conditions into the record, including HDC review prior to site development review; compliance with Article 10 site development standards; orientation of unit fronts to internal access drives; restrictions on dominant garage facades; permitted exterior materials (brick, stone, cement fiberboard such as Hardie), prohibition of vinyl siding; enhanced landscaping buffers; privacy fencing per the Old Conway Design Overlay District suburban zone standards; sign code conformity; and standard CUP timelines that render the permit null if construction does not commence within 18 months or the use ceases for more than 18 months.

A commissioner moved to approve the rezoning and later moved to approve the conditional‑use permit with staff’s 13 conditions; the motions passed on voice votes. The approvals by the planning commission are recommendations; both items will go to Conway City Council for final action. If approved by council and if development proceeds, the project will next require Historic District Commission review and site development review, with public notice for those steps.

Why it matters: the actions change the zoning from institutional back toward residential uses and open the site to higher‑density residential development than neighborhood neighbors cited as typical. The planning process will include further public hearings and technical reviews for drainage, access, lot coverage and historic‑district design.

The commission’s approval does not authorize construction or final building plans. If the developer seeks reduced setbacks or waivers from overlay standards, separate waiver or HDC processes would be required.