Planning and Zoning Commission recommends rezone for River Park addition after developer revises plat

The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-2 to recommend that the City Council approve a rezone and the developer’s revised plat for the River Park addition, following a presentation from Van Buskirk Companies and questions from commissioners about fire access, truck traffic and setbacks.

The commission’s action followed a redesigned layout in which the developer moved the commercial driveways to the outer edges of the parcel, consolidated four residential lots together and reduced the number of commercial lots from five to four. “We eliminated the driveway in the middle of the four residential parcels,” Jordan Heffner with Van Buskirk Companies said, describing the revisions presented to the commission.

The vote sends the item to the City Council for final action. Patrick (city staff) told the commission that “the city council passed it as a reading with the hope that you all would give them a revised recommendation based on the new layout,” and the commission then voted to forward the revised plan.

Why it matters: The revised plat changes how commercial and residential parcels will interface along Holly Boulevard and a parallel local street. Commissioners who voted against the recommendation said they remained concerned that commercial and delivery vehicles may use the residential street behind the commercial lots and that the layout could create a long dead-end with limited turning room for emergency vehicles.

Key issues raised - Fire access and turning radius: Commissioners asked whether the volunteer fire department had reviewed the plat and whether the back drive would provide adequate room for fire apparatus. One commissioner said the configuration “looks like a 500‑foot dead end street” and noted many municipalities require turnarounds or cul‑de‑sacs for dead ends longer than 250 feet. - Truck and delivery traffic: Commissioners repeatedly asked whether commercial truck traffic would be routed past fourplexes and residential fronts. Jordan Heffner and Steve Van Buskirk said developer plans call for multiple access points and mutual access easements to give commercial properties several ways to enter and exit, but they acknowledged they cannot guarantee private drivers’ routing: “We’re not a police department, so we can’t guarantee where people are gonna drive,” Heffner said. - Setbacks and driveway widths: Patrick and staff clarified dimensional rules: for General Business (GB) adjacent to residential the side‑yard setback increases (staff noted a GB side setback of 7 feet becomes 15 feet where next to residential), and the developer said a shown driveway width on the concept plan was 56 feet. Staff noted that final plats and site plans will need to document conformance with yard and setback rules. - Lot depths and commercial viability: The developer said the larger lot depths (up to about 374 feet) had driven the original layout; Van Buskirk representatives said revised lot depths will still accommodate typical strip‑retail building footprints (the developer referenced an 80‑foot building depth as typical). The developer said residential fourplexes are intended to provide an intermediate use rather than leaving the deep parcel vacant.

Commission discussion and vote Commissioners questioned whether the plan could be designed to keep most truck traffic off the residential street and whether utilities and plat frontage requirements required the north‑south connections to Riverstone. One commissioner argued the revised side access “at least it doesn’t have to cross the residential,” while others said they still worried about delivery vehicles using the back street. After discussion, a motion to recommend approval to the City Council passed on a roll call vote: Megan — Aye; Brian — Nay; Brooks — Aye; Rob — Nay; Alyssa — Aye; Michael — Aye (4–2).

Next steps The commission’s recommendation goes to the City Council for final consideration. City staff indicated the council had already taken a first reading, and the revised recommendation was intended to inform the council’s next reading.

Votes at a glance - Motion to recommend approval of the River Park rezone and revised plat to City Council — passed 4–2 (Megan, Brooks, Alyssa, Michael voted yes; Brian and Rob voted no).