Planning commission recommends annexation, I‑3 zoning for 783‑acre Riverport area despite neighborhood objections

The Little Rock Planning Commission on June 12 recommended annexation of roughly 783 acres into the city and concurrent establishment of the I‑3 Heavy Industrial zoning district for the area (file A‑350 / Z‑10172). The recommendation passed on a 6–4 roll‑call vote after more than an hour of public comment and questions from commissioners.

Staff said the annexation petition met state statutory requirements, citing a May 12 letter from the Arkansas Geographic Information Systems office confirming the petition’s compliance and a Pulaski County judge’s order filed May 14 that set the annexation boundaries. The staff report explained that the area is designated industrial in the city’s land‑use plan, that portions of Riverport Road and related rights‑of‑way (about 9,044 linear feet) are already dedicated, and that the city would become responsible for ongoing maintenance of those public road and drainage facilities upon annexation.

The annexation would bring the port‑area land under the city’s jurisdiction so future development would be reviewed under city regulations (including site plan review, stormwater controls and applicable state environmental review). Staff and applicants said water and sewer extensions to future development must be coordinated with Central Arkansas Water and the Little Rock Water Reclamation Authority; the applicant noted that no municipal solid‑waste service is proposed and that there are no residences on the undeveloped acreage.

The port and applicant representatives framed the annexation as an economic opportunity that could attract large industrial employers. Jack Thomas, speaking for the port/chamber team, said modeling showed “millions annually” in potential property‑tax revenue to the city from development of the property. Attorney Logan Timmis, representing the applicants, said the annexation and I‑3 zoning are prerequisites to attracting businesses; he said some prospective tenants (including a proposed 300,000‑square‑foot data center reported in media accounts) are conducting environmental and due‑diligence work but that the application before the commission was limited to annexation and zoning rather than approval of any single development.

Long‑time area residents objected repeatedly. James Wilson and Tara Lancaster said families have lived adjacent to the Radcliffe property for generations and expressed concerns that heavy‑industrial uses could create noise, air and water impacts and complicate emergency access. Lancaster asked specifically about water usage, electromagnetic and air‑quality impacts, and the potential for increased light and noise; she cited media reporting of a proposed 330,000‑square‑foot data center and said residents had not received full disclosure. “We just wanna know how we stand and what is what's going on with the land over there,” James Wilson said.

Commissioners split over competing priorities. Several commissioners said they support economic development and need more industrial sites for the Port of Little Rock; others said the record lacked sufficient detail about future uses and environmental impacts and expressed concern about placing I‑3 zoning adjacent to long‑standing single‑family and agricultural properties. Commissioners were also told that county review typically handled development in the area prior to annexation and that annexation would bring future projects under the city’s more stringent review processes, including state environmental coordination with the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality where applicable.

Commissioners asked procedural and technical questions about public notice (staff said property owners within 300 feet were notified and that other notices were sent as supplemental), coordination with state environmental review, infrastructure funding (staff and applicants said water/wastewater extensions would be paid by developers and road construction sought through a mix of state, county and federal funding with long‑term maintenance by the city), and buffering between new industrial sites and existing residences. Applicants and port representatives said Amazon has already acquired a portion of the northern acreage and completed environmental diligence on the land it purchased; Amazon’s 107‑acre purchase was described as part of a larger 338‑acre portion the port previously acquired.

After extended discussion the commission voted to recommend annexation and I‑3 zoning. Vote on A‑350 / Z‑10172: affirmative votes recorded for Commissioners Brown, Bernard, Hart, Trimble (Samad), Baxter and Vickers; votes against recorded for Commissioners Hodges, McDonald, Person and Russell. The commission’s action is a recommendation to the City Board of Directors, and the annexation and zoning will advance to that body for final action per the city’s procedures.

If the Board of Directors approves annexation and zoning, any future industrial development proposals on the newly annexed land will be subject to city site‑plan review, applicable state environmental review (including Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality coordination where triggered), stormwater and erosion controls, and local noise and lighting ordinances. Commissioners and residents asked the port and applicants to work with neighbors on buffers and mitigation for noise, light and other potential impacts as development plans are refined.