Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Rezoning Culture Road topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission defers Culture Road annexation after heavy public comment; staff to re-advertise
Summary
The commission deferred a contested annexation/rezone request for a 109‑acre parcel near Culture Road to the Sept. 4 meeting after residents raised flooding, wildlife and traffic concerns and staff identified an incorrect property PIN in the advertisement.
The Conway Planning Commission on Aug. 7 deferred action on a rezoning and annexation request for a 109‑acre parcel adjacent to Midtown Village and Conway Christian School (the “Culture Road” parcel), asking staff and the applicant to return at the Sept. 4 meeting with corrected public notices and additional details.
Staff said a large portion of the subject parcel lies in an AE flood zone and that the parcel’s future land use map shows conservation preservation in the middle of the tract. Staff also told the commission the applicant proposed to zone the floodplain portions as conservation preservation upon annexation and to request R‑2 (medium density residential) zoning for the buildable portions.
“Staff is aware of the concern of potential environmental impacts, limitations of current infrastructure, and overdevelopment in the area, which creates worsening traffic conditions,” staff said in a presentation summarizing the parcel’s FEMA flood zone mapping, the city’s resiliency element adopted in 2023, and a 2023 ordinance that allows split zoning of environmentally sensitive areas on annexation.
The applicant, Rob Wolffong with Development Resource Group, said the property is predominantly timber and that under current county zoning it could be developed by right with more than 200 lots. He said the proposal would preserve the central floodplain area by rezoning it to conservation preservation and that the likely R‑2 density would be roughly 1.5 units per acre in the developable area.
“Today, I can put 208 units on,” Wolffong told the commission, listing a range of uses permitted under the current county zoning; he said the applicant’s plan seeks to protect the AE flood zone and contain stormwater on site.
Dozens of nearby residents spoke during public comment, expressing concern about flood risk, tree clearing, wildlife displacement, traffic congestion, emergency response times, and perceived lack of transparency. Speakers included residents of Midtown Village and the Midtown Village Association president, who called for buffers between the subdivisions and any new development.
Planning staff said the public notice for the hearing contained an incorrect property PIN and recommended re‑advertising to ensure the public was properly informed. To avoid any appearance of impropriety and to collect full public input, staff recommended—and the commission agreed—to defer the rezoning recommendation to Sept. 4.
Commissioners opened public comment to three additional speakers after staff’s recommendation and then voted to defer the item. The commission noted that annexation is often a multi‑step council process and that zoning recommendations will ultimately be forwarded to city council for action.
The applicant said the conservation preservation area will remain protected and that connectivity and road access issues will be addressed in the formal plan submittal process. Staff and the applicant agreed to return with clarified exhibits and acreage figures for the conservation preservation (CP) area and the residential portion before the next meeting.
The commission scheduled the continued consideration for Sept. 4 at 5:30 p.m.
