The Blytheville City Council should rip up the zoning regulation book.
No need to have a bunch of codes to follow. The Blytheville Planning Commission is fully capable of deciding what belongs where in the city without any guidelines.
That seems to be the general feeling of some commission members.
In the January meeting, the board wouldn't budge when a company affiliated with AT&T wanted to put up a tower on Lockard that would have provided better cell phone service.
It leaned on an outdated section of the book to try to block the request, which was opposed by adjacent property owner and Planning Commission member Jonathan Abbott. When Planning Commission chairman Jim McClain asked for a motion, there was none, effectively meaning it was a denial. The company appealed to the City Council, which sent it back to the Planning Commission with more information that will likely be pondered -- and probably denied -- at the April meeting.
Then, Tuesday night, the Commission basically ignored the book.
McClain read off a checklist for overlay district regulations, and Dollar General met each one for a potential site at Sixth and Highland, currently Penn's Barbecue.
The property was zoned B-2, which is the company's requested use. It was zoned that way long before many of the nice, surrounding homes popped up. The only issue to consider: Does Dollar General's plans meet the more stringent requirements of an overlay district?
"He (Dollar General developer Sam Ware) has met what is required in this book," Code Enforcement building inspector Rick Ash told the Commission.
It seemed a no-brainer. And had the store's name been withheld, it would have been, nor would there have been an audience full of opponents who lived nearby.
"Do the citizens of that area not have any say?" said Commission member Peggy Lemons, who made the motion to table the issue, one that passed 4-3 with the other three members present abstaining and McClain unable to vote because it wasn't a tie. "This is where they live, this is their neighborhood. So just because it's legal in this book, does that mean it has to be?"
They did get a say. Prior to that statement, McClain granted the unusual request for residents John Logan and Dan Ritchey to address the board on the group's behalf and encourage tabling the issue another month -- this, after Ware had said the company was on a timetable.
Allowing audience participation is only required during public hearings.
As for Lemons' last sentence, the Planning Commission's role is to determine if a request complies with the book, not to try to block something that does.
The latter was blatantly obvious Tuesday night.
Commission member Bill Bracey, who seconded Lemons' motion, claimed lighting was his big concern, even though Ware agreed to go with a much smaller, lighted monument sign that would be lower than the fence around it.
If a high-end retail store wanted to develop on the site, one could bet this wouldn't be an issue.
The attempt to prevent the project has nothing to do with lighting.
The elephant in the room is: Those of lower socioeconomic status might infiltrate the neighborhood and lower property values.
I wonder if the issue would have been tabled -- or residents would have been afforded the opportunity to speak -- if the project was on McHaney, South 21st or a similar area.
My gut says the board would have claimed its hands are tied -- as commission members basically did with the AT&T situation.
Fortunately for Dollar General, the company can appeal to the City Council.
And it has sent a letter of appeal to the Council. The issue could be on Tuesday's Council agenda.
Hopefully, if it is, the Council doesn't send this one back to the Planning Commission, which seems poised not to vote on an issue anyway these days.
mbrasfield@blythevillecourier.com