Board of Zoning Adjustment and Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

button. We have less than a minute before the meeting starts, but I did just want to remind I see mics are up with our new recording system. You need to use your mics for the foyer requirements to make sure um our new fancy recording system pulls directly from the microphones. Thank you. All right. I saw is 4:30. So, we'll call to order the city of Bella Vista board of zoning adjustment. Uh, call the role, please.

Here, Barner here, Plesen here, Sedbury here, Portillo here, Wagman here, Floyd here. All right, we do have a quorum. Next up, we have our regular meeting minutes from August 11th. I'll make a motion to be approved as submitted. Got a motion from Farner. Second. Second from Sedbury. All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed? All right. Meeting minutes are approved. Uh we have nothing for unfinished business. Uh we do have two public hearings tonight for zoning variances. Just for a a matter of the record, uh we will give the city staff up to 10 minutes to uh present the uh variance request to us and then the applicant can come up and take 15 minutes to address any comments uh or add on to the staff report and then we will open it up to the public. Uh each person is allowed to speak up to five minutes um and only speak directly with the commission. It's not a Q&A time and then we'll give the applicant 10 minutes to rebut any comments that were made. Uh with that, we'll take up public hearing 202560729, a variance request on the R1 building setbacks for an existing structure under construction at 26 Brford Drive. Planner Hayatt.

Thank you. Mhm.

This property is located in the central area of Bella Vista City Limits uh near Lake Avalon and is lot 14 block 7 of the Rner subdivision. Zoning code section 109-753A establishes a front setback from all property lines shall be 20 feet unless otherwise stated on the subdivision plat. The applicant is requesting a variance from the 15t platted front setback for an existing structure that is currently under construction. Uh per the applicant's letter, the project was undergoing inspections beginning in early February. On March 5th, the property owner reached out to Carol Electric regarding establishing power to the site. Uh Carol needed to see that the footers had been dug and they inspected on March 20th. After about eight weeks, the contractor began emailing Carol regarding getting power established. Uh roughly four weeks later, Carol let the contractor know that they were looking into establishing power and that they had been behind because of storms. On July 1st, Carol responded with concerns on how close the structure was to the power line running along Bradford on on their side of the street. Uh the contractor began looking further into it and discovered that the block wall was not within the platted setbacks for the lot. Uh inspections had been ongoing with the footing and block wall passing on March 22nd and 24th respectively. Uh the project continued on receiving inspections for framing and received approval to insulate on July 8th. An agreement was worked out with Carol Electric to move the power line to the other side of Bradford. Uh the contractor then reached out to planning and began the process for requesting a variance and obtaining an asbuilt uh which confirmed the structure sits at roughly 7.5 ft from the front property line. Bradford Drive is labeled as a non-classified residential street per the master street plan and is with and is within a lowdensity residential area per the future land use plan. Uh staff finds that the setback obstruction is of the applicant's doing. Therefore, the request is not meeting the three criteria for obtaining a variance. Um all uh legal notifications uh legal ad was noticed in the public or the

public hearing notice was noticed in the weekly vista on Wednesday October 20 or August 20th sorry and a public hearing sign was posted on the property on August 29th. Uh due to the analysis above staff is recommended denial as the analysis did not find all three requirements to be met. Any questions for staff? Yes, ma'am. You're saying the structure is 7 and 12 feet from the front property line, but they're asking for a 15 foot building. The platted setback for the lot was 15 ft. The house is actually sitting at 7 and 12. They they encroach seven and 1/2 ft into the front setback

into the 15 foot set. Correct. And on the the asbuilts pulled up, um it shows it's roughly 16 and a half feet from the edge of the road and he called out the driveway is 32 feet from the paved road to the garage entrance. When they applied for their building permit, what was they're required to submit a site plan, correct? Yes. And the site plan showed it to be within the setback. So, it was meeting the 15. Uh, sounds like the block wall got placed off. And was that inspected and did it pass on behalf of the city?

It did continue to to pass inspections. It made it through to framing and and insulation. I believe that was March uh passed block wall on March 22nd and 24th. Sorry, footing was 22nd. The block wall was passed on the 24th. Um and then in July July 8th, uh they were received approval to go ahead and insulate the structure.

By and chance, were we going through a staff transition at that point? Because I realize we had some challenges historically. Our building inspectors typically inspect the structure. They don't they don't essentially focus on setbacks. Uh so when the footing was inspected, that's probably only what the building inspector looked at was the footing. Um they didn't take a tape measure out or anything like that. They're not qualified really to create an asbuilt like this to certify where it's at from the road. Um so that's essentially in the past when you talk about challenges we've had in the past, similar thing. The footing was inspected. the setback was not inspected or certified by the building inspector and so it made it um pretty far in advance similar to this situation as well before someone caught it and said this is

typically it's the utility actually that catches it and then I believe Carol caught this one too as well right because it was too close to their utility easement and did we get a comment from them on this no comments they they had worked out a plan to move the line so it alleviated their concern okay so Carol's concerns have been met so so is Bill correct ally just not st correctly and they built in the wrong place. Building code, it seems like it has been passing. It has been passing inspections just 7 and 1/2 ft closer to the road than it than what was planned. Yeah. Our our building department just looks at it for workmanship.

They do not look at it as a surveyor or anything else. That is the 100% the contractor's responsibility. It is not the city's in any shape, form or fashion. was and a topographical survey was surely issued with your grading and erosion control plan, right? So, that thing has been staked and Okay. Who's general contractor record?

Well, we'll we'll get to that in a minute. Yeah. I mean, I I know it's not the building inspector's job, but that seems like a pretty significant weak spot in our inspection process that it's gotten so far along with continued approved inspections with it being that I mean, it's not a foot. It's 50% into the front setback. That's at least noticeable. I don't know that that bothers me quite a bit about this.

Yeah. Any other questions for staff? Not. Is the applicant present? If you could come up and state your name for the record and who you represent. My name is John Lighty and I'm a builder. And I represent Ken Hagerty, the owner, my investor. Okay. All right. And you got somebody else with you. Is he going to speak also on your behalf? No, sir. He's just here to answer any questions if someone has one for him. He's the contractor that staked it for me. Okay. Um, you have anything you'd like to add to this,

David? Yeah. Yes, sir. David Plattz is my uh engineer of record, and he has always been right on target. Um, Victor has been doing concrete work for me now for 15 years. We've done over a 100 houses in Bentonville and Rogers. I've done 92 houses in in Bella Vista. Not as my as a contractor, but when I was working for another contractor. This has never happened before. Um uh it's unfortunate. Um we did reach out to Carol Electric numerous times. Um I have emails at least 12 times asking them that we needed power. We need power. We need power. And uh when they finally contacted me uh in I think it was at the end of July uh they said there was an issue. And so I went down to Carol Electric and and I met with two of the leaders there and they told me that it was too close to the power lines that they could move the power lines but they would not and at at our expense but they would not move the power lines unless the uh city uh guaranteed that we would be able to get a CFO because they don't want to go to that extreme. So, it's a it's an unfortunate situation that I've never faced before to be honest with you. And um even though it sounds, you know, very very close to the road and I appreciate your concern there, it is 16 1/2 ft from the pavement to the front of the house. And then the um the driveway you it's 32 feet. You could you could park two cars in it with not without um um any obscuring the uh road at at any particular time.

Any questions for the applicant? What is what this piece of the house that's that is encroaching into the building setback? What is that in the house? That's the uh that's uh one bedroom and um the front bathroom. It's a two bath house and two bedrooms. Do I have any photography? Just out of curiosity. Did that make it in the file? Okay. What What is the status of the house? I'm sorry.

What What What status of construction are you at with the house? Uh we just finished drywalling. So you've kept working even knowing there's an issue. I'm That was my fault. I didn't know that I wasn't supposed to do that. But I mean you made you were made aware of the issue back in July and you kept Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And I think I think Commissioner Sedbury made a very good statement. I mean, if you've done as many houses as you said, how could you not have known looking at that power line that this house was too close? I don't know. I don't have an answer to that. I just never, you know, when I did commercial work, I definitely recognized when we had petty bones and cherry pickers out there, but

yeah, we don't have that with the house cuz we do stick build trusses and I don't use any heavy equipment. The precedence that we have is the last one like this, we denied it and then finally reached an agreement where the general contractor agreed to not build any home from Bella Vista for how long? Oh, I can't remember. Was it uh three years or five years? Three. I think that's that's the precedence that's before you is start over with the house or agree not to build any more homes in Bella Vista for three years. That was a that was a condition of a settlement. That's right.

Uh on a variance appeal. Yeah. Denial of a variance appeal to the is a very similar situation to this. Carol Electric had to move the power line. It was an encroachment in their easement and the setback against a road. It uh there there had been there were other circumstances related to that builder. Uh this was not not to go into that too much, but there was more than just that as well. Right. Um

as the as the attorney for the city, I I don't understand. I mean, we we we see an owner who's in a bad spot or a builder that's in a bad spot, but from the legal perspective, I see a surveyor that may have some significant liability or an engineer that may have some significant liability. And it's not like there's not a recourse against those entities if there is fault, right? So, you know, it's not it gets thrown up on your altar for for mercy as if that is all that can happen. and that is just not the case.

Appreciate that. And I will say um out of all due respect that at two times the um building inspectors and it's on the portal any of you can see that on the portal that um Bobby Zenini and um the former chief building inspector I can't think of his name right now that left back in December. Um he did they have cautioned me about hey the um house is too close to the property line and then I had David Plattz to go back out at my expense to restake it and it was always correct.

But it wasn't not on I'm not talking about this one. No sir. I'm talking about two former houses. And I even asked could that be changed in the portal because anyone can look at it and it failed the initial inspection at Footers because the inspector thought it was too close to the property line. Did you rely on your concrete subcontractor to flag stake? Yes, sir. He he has his own equipment and he had hired a new guy. Uh he can speak to this but he had just hired a new guy with a all the instrumentation and and that's how it got off.

Well, it is human error which is unfortunate and it is not an error you will ever forget. So think about the growth opportunity. Absolutely. All right. True.

Any other questions for the applicant? If we ask you to take a seat real quick. We'll have to go ahead and conduct the public hearing. Um, at this time, we'll go ahead and open up the public hearing. Anybody that would like to address the commission or the board of adjustments concerning this variance request, if you would come up and state your name and address for the record, and we'll give you up to five minutes to speak to the board. Seeing none, uh, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. If you go ahead and come back up to the podium, sir. Um, commissioners, up to you all. Conversation, additional conversations or questions for the applicant. Of course, if you have anything you'd like to add, you do have an additional 10 minutes.

No, sir. It's pretty much the asbuilt speaks for itself and I'm just here at your mercy. Question. Yes, ma'am. Well, I just go back to our variance standards and it says that the unique circumstances of the subject property do not result from the applicant's actions. It's very clear that unfortunately this results from the applicant's actions and I don't think that we should be repeatedly put in the position of solving problems that weren't create that were created by the applicant. Unfortunately,

any motion? I'm waiting to see if there's any other questions or comments. All right. If not, can I get a motion to approve zoning bearings 202560729? So move. Got a motion from Wagman. Second. We got a second from Farner. Call the role, please. No no no no ma'am Farer no Portillo no Ellis no staff will get with you on next on your next steps for you do have additional remedies that you can pursue thank you for being here thank you

all right next up we have zoning variance 2025607 757 a variance request on the R1 building setbacks for a proposed structure at 13 Cburn Lane uh Planner Laroo.

All right. So this property is located uh within western Bella Vista lot 16 block 7 of the Brigadeun subdivision. Uh the applicable code section is 10975B3 which requires a minimum front setback of 20 feet in the R1 zone. The applicant of course is seeking a variance of this setback uh to provide a for 15 uh feet in lie of the required 20 and administrative variance may only be approved um for the reduction of no less than 20 ft. Uh this law is a corner lot and the platted setback does run along the entire curvature of the parcel um and would reduce the allowable depth of the home from 38 feet to 28 feet. Uh the applicant has been working with Corbett Environmental to design septic solutions for both the 15 and 20 foot uh front setback. However, no ADH permit has yet been issued. Coburn Circle is classified as a residential street per the master street plan and is within a neighborhood area. Um although the lot is 32 acres, the unique shape and minimum setback requirements uh to accommodate the septic would reduce the allowable footprint of the home and otherwise a variance would uh be in line with the spirit intent of the R1 district. There was no public comment at the time of this report and all legal notifications have been met. Staff is recommending approval of the variance request.

All right, any questions for staff? If not, is the applicant present? if you would come up and give us your name and address and he represents sir. Good evening. Jar Jarrett Mlen. My address is uh 8 Hadley Lane Bell Vista. Thank you for taking a look at this. Yes, sir.

Um yeah, if I can answer any questions. My my dad and I purchased the lot. Edwin Neil LLC is my dad and I's uh my dad and I's LLC and we purchased a lot together for the use of a speck home here. I've built I'm a small builder. I build eight or nine houses a year. So I'm building currently building two in Bella Vista right now and this would be another speck home that my dad and I were planning on building on this lot. Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Is this a pre-esigned home that you're trying to build this lot?

Uh, currently I'm building this home. I just got a building application on 41 Fleetwood and it would be this exact same house plan. So, it wasn't designed for this lot. It was it was it was just off the shelf. was but was in my I have an inventory of plans and it and I had an architect draw it up but I didn't have him

I have about 18 to 20 plans that fit.3 to.34 acre lots two-bedroom and threebedroom and this is the only plan of my 18 plans that I have that works on this lot um I do understand that you know in Bella Vista that every a lot of lots have hardship and I'm not saying that this one has any more or less hardship than others. It's just with that corner lot being the way it's designed. It's such a beautiful lot, but just so much of the footage gets taken out. And really, I'm I'm not needing really any more setback on the west end. It's really just that front little portion. I don't know if you guys have the file that shows that I put a put a footprint on it.

And it really only really needs about another three to four feet there on that on that north side. for that plan to work on there. It is only 28 feet. When Corbett Environmental had drew up my what I always have her do is reverse design. And when she did, she gave me the footprint of that boxed area. So that that needs current for a threebedroom, it needs 300 and it perked at 65. I think it needs 365 linear feet. And so with her lines laid out on that lot, the lines go all so so far north on the lot, it just takes out hardly it just takes out really most of your footprint for a house there. I mean, you could put a two-bedroom, but it'd be very small for that for that nice big lot on the corner. Any other questions for the applicant? All right. But if not, if you go ahead and take a seat for just a second, we'll conduct the public hearing or you can just step aside or whatever you'd like to do.

Um, at this time, we'll go ahead and open the floor for a public hearing. If there's anybody that would like to address the board concerning this request, if you would come up and state your name and address for the record. All right, seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Uh, sir, if you would come back up to the podium. Commission or I'll never get this right. Board members, are there any uh additional questions or comments for the applicant or staff? Yes, ma'am.

Um I think that the owner just specified that if this were a two-bedroom house instead of a three-bedroom house that it could fit on the lot. And I think that solves our problem. The other issue I have with a 15 foot setback, and I've seen this in other places, um that means you would not be able to park a large truck in your driveway without it extending beyond the boundaries of your lot. And I think that that's a problem in addition to the fact that there is a solution other than what you're proposing. Yes, sir.

Did you make efforts with your design team to try to make the massing fit? I I have I made some efforts to try to made some efforts with the 28 feet that I currently like with the 20 foot building set back with 28 ft trying to do anything with 28 feet with I mean you can it's already a twotory plan um but taking that 28 feet and trying to get any of the bathroom or bedroom or living room moved in it without it condensing the space so much it becomes unusable. So I I did try that. I did look at design work and try to redesign it where we could shrink it another four feet from front to back.

What's the total square footage of the home current with it's a twotory and the total square feet is uh 2,200. So, it's a it's a very nice plan, but but it you it's 2,200 because it's twotory. Three three and two. 32. Yes, sir. And if you met the setback obligations, you would go down to two and two.

I wouldn't be uh would not be able to use that plan on that lot. Um I would not be able to keep that that that profile footprint or even better. I'd have to I I would take that design completely out and try to go and create a small tin like a small more of a small home because there wouldn't be there wouldn't be anything that would fit on that 28t depth because it's got 55 feet wide but 28 foot depth. So, from a design standpoint, going into a two-bedroom house would be it would it would I just have to go into a total design of a of more like a tiny home. It'd look like a tiny home.

Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Yes, sir. Oh, yes, ma'am. Just had one other question. When you bought this lot in May, did you uh make it subject to soils work? Yes, ma'am. I sure did. So you could have known before you purchased the lot that your plan was not going to fit.

So when you do when you with the Bell Vista lots when they sell, we know how quickly they sell you you're typically trying to get a lot closed in 30 days. So what what I do whenever I have a lot under contract with 30 days we really can in 30-day period knowing that you have to get the results back within we always generally on contracts 5 days before closing so that so but we don't get a preliminary septic design from our design you're not able to get a septic design a preliminary septic design to see I did know that I perked at 65 gallons I did know that I would need 365 5 linear feet for a threebedroom. And how many for a two-bedroom?

For a two-bedroom, I believe it's I believe my memory I think it's 285 ft. Big difference.

It is a big a big difference. Um and so I did know what my perk results were. I did not realize that they would the lines would need to traverse that far north into the backyard of where that is. And that was the reason why with the septic design going in that it takes up the majority of the footprint of the house. And so it's difficult to get a preliminary septic design done in 30 days. We can get perk results but not typically not septic designs. We we have granted minor variances before on encroaching the setback for like the uh trunk lines as long as the lateral lines are kept out of the setbacks. And looking at the layout, some minor adjustments like that might give you what you need without a variance on your building setback.

I believe you're correct. I could keep the 20 foot building setback if I might be able to get some variance on where to put the lines. And it's not the actual lateral lines, but the actual like lines that serve the lateral lines. Oh, sure. Yes, sir.

You know, we we've done that before without too much. Yeah, you can see on the on the pre that's a prelim that you're seeing right now on the screen. Those lines are 70 65 feet, 70 feet, 60 feet. So that just takes up with that huge curvature of the lot, it just takes out so much of your usable space for a home there. And that was the the reason for the the hardship of the request. Can we flip to the next slide one more time, please? That shows the ask. There we go.

Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for the for the applicant or staff? If not, I'll entertain a u a motion to approve Oh, shoot. I lost it. Sorry. A motion to approve zoning variance 202560757. Could I make a motion to table in lie of additional design work and have them resubmit? Is that process I mean is that where we do this now?

We have certain requirements in our code that decision be made within a time window and if it is not it is deemed approved. So not for variances. Not for variances. No. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, you could. with a different request. I think he's he's got time to make the next meeting with a different request, right? Uh it's due this Friday. So the clock would if we tabled it, the clock keeps going. If you deny it, it starts over.

Well, if you tabled it, you would table it to a specific meeting. Yeah. And then we wouldn't have to publish another public hearing, but it would have to be over the same request. So the request can't change. Yeah, you're you're I think I think we'd have to go back through the process because you're change you're going to be asked for a completely different variance if it's on the sub system. So the best process is then to vote today unless he wants to withdraw it or ask us to table this specific one. We should take action on the specific barriers to have before us because we've been given a u we hold the public hearing and stuff. Right. Okay. So

well then I move a motion that we take it to vote. All right. We got a motion from Wagman. Second. Second from Cleen. And call the roll, please. A motion to approve. Motion to approve. A motion. Motion to approve and seconded. Lloyd, no. Cleen, no. Sedbury, no. Ma'am Farer, no. Portillo, no. Wang, no. Ellis,

no. Uh, I think you can get with staff by Friday, get get something modified, get it republished and get back before us next month. And like I said, there's some things that we've done, but it's hard for us to grant ability to set back as you just Yeah, I understand. It's first time I've ever ever ever done this for a request and appreciate you guys' time. Yeah, I think there's some ways to to work around it. And and can I just ask to clarify the ways that you're saying to work around it is to work within the the se the the the lateral lines.

We not the lateral line. We've allowed like the the trunk lines that serve the lateral lines encroach into that 10-ft setback as long as the lateral lines itself are kept out of the setback. And looking at the drawing, you've got like the couple lateral lines that are really close to the house that's creating the issue for you. Yeah, those were those are sitting about 10 feet off the 10 foot setback. But like that diverter box, you could shift that diverter box over a little bit, pull those lateral lines over and probably not need anything other than a very minor variance that we have granted several times. And also may ask a question. The the the tank is allowed to be moved within 7 and 1/2 ft as well. Is that correct? Uh

the tank must be 10 ft from all property lines and structures. And that's also echoed from ADH. Correct. The tank doesn't look like it's a problem based off of the plan you've got right here. Okay. It looks to me like it's just that one lateral line. The third one down is the only one that's really giving you any major heartburn. But we we do not have an issue with the diverter box being shifted into that setback. We've approved stuff like that. Okay. Thank you. Not the lateral. The lateral lines must stay. The lateral lines must stay, but the diverter box can encroach a little after checking with ADH. After checking with I don't ADHD. I understand. And and your application would be viewed on its own merits. This isn't a guarantee you would be approved.

Correct. I understand. I just I'm giving you some background. I Yeah, I understand very much. Okay. Thank you, committee. Appreciate it. Yeah. All righty. Uh, anything for open discussion? That closes our new business for the board of zoning adjustments. Staff doesn't have anything for open discussion. All righty. With that, we will go ahead and uh next up will be our planning a regular planning commission meeting. So, with that, we'll adjourn our board of zoning adjustments. Alrighty. Uh, we'll call ahead and call to order the city of Bella Vista Planning Commission meeting. Uh, if you call the RO, please.

Um, can we make sure the technical is working? Yes, we can. Oh, before we proceed, let's make sure we're meeting FOY requirements. Turn it off and then turn it back on. Yep. Say, normally it'll blink. Oh, it will blink. Well, it'll turn off and then it'll turn back on when you're ready. This is new equipment, so bear with us. Supposed to be easier and better. I saw it shut off and come back on. You good? All righty. Well, we're called to order. If you would call the role, please. Ellis here. Barner here. Plesen here. Sedbury here. Portillo here. Wagman here.

Lloyd here. All righty. We do have a quorum. Uh, next up is our regular meeting minutes from August 11th. Make a motion that be approved as submitted. A motion from Farner. Second. Second from Partillo. All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed? All right. Any minutes are approved. Uh, next up we have our public input session. This will be an opportunity for anybody in the public to address the planning commission uh concerning any published or any non-published item. We will be conducting a public hearing later on for the reasoning request before us. So, anything other than that one reasonzoning request now will be your only chance as the public to address the commission on any item or non-published item. All right. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing for the public input session. Next up, we have unfinished business. We have waiver 20259726A and Platt 202559124. We will vote on these separate though. Planner Grading.

Good evening. Thank you. This property is located in the central area of Bella Vista uh within town center north commercial subdivision. Uh section 107128 and incidental subdivision review and approval. Section 107 and 130 section 4 states view criteria for approval or disapproval of incidental subdivisions shall be given based on the following threshold guidelines. There is adequate street right away as required by these regulations and the master street plan. Uh the applicant is requesting a property line adjustment and a waiver of section 107130 section 4 for adequate rideway of uh 50 ft for the highway 71 on-ramp that is identified as major arterial on our master street plan. The purpose of the request is to clarify and adjust property lines to support a large-scale development previously approved by the planning commission on June 9th of this year. This project pertains to redevelopment of town center located immediately adjacent of Highway 71 on-ramp. This previously tabled item has been updated to include a detailed depiction of the proposed property lines to ensure clarity, transparency, and alignment with established land use protocols. Staff requested the applicant submit updated site illustrations accurately reflecting the proposed parcel boundaries. The revised drawings have been received and staff has determined that they meet all applicable C3, sorry, C3 zoning requirements. Surrounding land uses include R1 single family, uh, C1 neighborhood commercial, and C3 central commercial districts. The comprehensive plan for 2040 designates this area's type 1 neighborhood center envisioned to support a mix of residential, commercial, and civic uses. The master street plan designates Lancashire Boulevard as major arterial. Town center is non-classified and requires a 50-ft rideway dedication along the Highway 71 on-ramp. This site also lies adjacent to a priority warn bike lane and is not located within a designated flood plane. Um we have not received any public comments. Um there

are no outstanding technical comments and uh based on the analysis above staff recommends approval of this so long as the PCA approves the waiver. Any questions for staff? How much additional rightway are they're going to have to dedicate? Oh, it was how much? It was Was it 80? So, it would have been would have been an additional 30 ft along that frontage road. Mhm. An additional 30 ft. Yeah.

Any other questions for staff? If not, the applicant would come forward. State your name and who you represent, please. Good evening. My name is Evan McMahon with Craft and Toll. Um, happy to answer any questions on this, but just to recap, we did reach out to ARDOT on uh what they would want as far as right of way, and they didn't require or want anything additional to what already exists today. And if we were to dedicate that additional ride ofway, it would really eat into the usable space on that lot. It's pretty tight as is, so it would really create a lot of issues with trying to get a a new building on those lots. Any other questions for the applicant?

If not, we'll take a motion to approve waiver 20259726A. So move. Got a motion from Portello, a second from Lloyd. Call the role, please. Farer, yes. Portillo, yes. Wagman, yes. Lloyd, yes. Clen, yes. Sedbury, yes. Ellis abstain. Any additional comments or questions on plat 202559124. All right. If not, can we get a motion to approve plat 202559124? So move. Motion from Farner. Second. Second from Sedbury. Call the role, please. Portillo,

yes. Wagon, yes. Lloyd, yes. Cleen, yes. Sedbury, yes. Barner, yes. Ellis, abstain. Uh, next up we have waiver 202559726B, Planner High.

Thank you. Uh, located in the same location, uh, section 107342E2 states, retaining wall shall be placed a minimum of 7.5 ft or 1.5 times the height of the wall, whichever is greater away from all property lines. In cases where the retaining wall is supporting an access drive, the wall shall be allowed up to the front property line. Uh the applicant is requesting a waiver of retaining wall separation requirements along a previously approved large scale development and now property line adjustment uh for the site reconstruction of the parking lot and retaining wall along the western side of the existing town center shopping center. Um, as you will recall in the previous large scale, the applicant was proposing again for this reconstruction, um, they would also previously demolish structures and return that area to green space while also replacing that existing retaining wall. But the retaining wall currently, uh, sits or sorry, it will sit at just over 13.5 ft, which would require 20.4 ft of separation from the newly proposed property line. But as it exists, the wall will sit or does sit roughly 3.9 feet from the proposed property line. Uh Town Center again is a private road per the master street plan. Uh but the site is surrounded by major arterials to the west and south.

Any questions for staff? The applicant was present. If you come back up to the podium, state your name and who you represent for the record, please. Evan McMahon with Craftton Soul. And again, just to note, we're replacing an existing retaining wall and that northern portion of it is supporting that access drive, which is why we're asking for the variance. That's a waiver, not a variance, by the way. Any questions for the applicant? If not, can I get a motion to approve waiver 20259726B? So moved. Motion from Clelesen. Second. Second from Farner. Call the RO, please. Wang, yes. Lloyd,

yes. Pleas, yes. Sedbury, yes. Barner, yes. Portillo, yes. Abstain. All right. Next up, under new business, we have large scale 20257468, a request to extend the approved development permit for Republic Service Transfer Station, Planner Hyatt.

All right. Thank you. Um, as you will remember, uh, back in March, you approved the large scale for Republic Services in which they were going to construct an 8,000 foot maintenance facility, uh, would have four overhead doors to provide on-site maintenance for their, uh, service trucks. Uh, also included a 20x 20 concrete cartwash, um, etc. Um, they have been in the process with their, uh, water main extension and have begun the process of receiving bids. However, uh due to the six-month time constraint, um they actually were running out of time. So, wanted to uh per their letter request another 180day extension for that project in order to get bids and um get their health department um water or water main extension approved. Uh they do have the permit number um and basically get everything underway to then begin construction. Any questions for staff? The applicants present if you come up going up to the podium. Just state your name and who you represent for the record, please.

Good evening. Steven Brown with public services. Any other questions for the applicant? If not, can we get a motion to approve 180day extension for large scale 202557468? So moved. Got a motion from Farner and a second from Sedbury. Call the RO, please. Lloyd, yes. Cleen, yes. Sedbury, yes. Farer, yes. Portillo, yes. Wagman, yes. Ellis, yes. Good luck, sir. Thank you.

You betcha. All right. Next up, we have public hearing uh for a reasonzoning at 20259940. Request to reszone a subject property from RE residential estate to C2 light local commercial near Lancenshshire Boulevard and Oakhill Drive. Planner Grady.

Good evening. This property is located in Bella Vista along the south side of Lancashire Boulevard near the intersection of Oakill Road and is um located on lot 23 of the Mountain Springs Estate Third Subdivision. Per section 10940C, the applicant is requesting to reszone their property from residential estate to C2 light commercial in our future land use will be local commercial to better serve the existing land use surrounding the parcel. Per the most recently adopted zoning map, the parcel is zoned residential estate. The zoning map currently under final stages with the city council also shows this lot as residential estate. Due to timing of the reform project, staff is recommending to consider the uses listed within the proposed C2 local commercial as well as current C2 light commercial. As the requested zone may no longer exist in the near future pending council approval, the parcel is currently surrounded by the following zoning districts: C2 light commercial to the north, residential estate to the south, east, and west. Existing adjacent land uses include residential on both sides directly adjacent to lot uh and commercial uh land uses to the north across the street. Further, the master street plan depicts linkshshire as major arterial. The future land use plan shows this property be within a future residential neighborhood. However, the future land use plan does not or sorry does provide a general overlay for a future village center having intense uses at the intersection of 340 and 279 and further uh feathering out near the edges of the node. The village center is intended to provide a midscale commercial activity center uh that is limited in both scale and use intensity to serve the needs of the greater community such as core retail services and institutional use. These centers should be well connected to adjacent neighborhoods to promote walking or biking. Village centers should also be supported by expanding housing types,

small parks, civic open spaces that are promote promoted by the community. This area is not affected by the flood plane. It should be noted staff finds the schedule of permitted uses for the requested zoning district to support the goals of the 2040 comprehensive plan such as retail centers, offices, and clinics and varied civic uses. However, existing uses of residential houses may not be compatible for C2 due to its intensity of scheduled uses in both charts. Um, we have received a few calls with questions and we received one email with comments. Um, they had concerns about the reszone. Should the developer consider doing a liquor store or a marijuana location? Uh, all public notices have been listed um in the weekly vista for August 20th. The applicant sent the required certified mail August 22nd and staff posted the public hearing sign on August 29th. Uh based on the above analysis and the adjacent land uses, staff does not recommend a C2 zoning of light or local commercial.

All right, any questions for staff? If not, if the applicant is present, could you come up to the podium and state your name and who you represent for the record or your address, please? Good evening. Um, Christopher Brandon. I represent Jack Kho, the property owner. Um, we were under the uh um assumption it fell under the 2040 plans. Uh, C2 is directly uh across the street. Um, it's pretty full. I was in there eating uh just yesterday or excuse me just uh just Saturday um at the both table. Um be great to have a opportunity to add some more services for for that area. Uh would certainly appreciate your the opportunity to to reszone that as as a C2 person.

Any uh questions or comments for the applicant? Do you have an intended use? Not yet. We can't ask that. Sorry. Strike that curiosity. Yes. We're not allowed to ask. I want to I want to bring up one issue. I don't I don't want it. I'm sorry. If you weren't done, I was going to be quiet and let you proceed. But no, I'm done.

Because of the of the timing of this, it creates some interesting situations. Uh we've got a comprehensive land use uh resoning for the whole city that's going to be on third reading this month. It includes this parcel. I'm not sure I I believe we had an answer. It still calls for it to be the residential re. This is the proposed zoning map on the screen right now that council is considering.

Yeah, I know. I I realize that, but there's no guarantee they will adopt that. And so, um, the the timing scenario is that if they approve this before they approve the comprehensive reszoning, they could be zoning it and then putting it immediately back as re unless that process is also amended because that that that's already a proposed map in front of them. So it just is something I'm not saying any of these things can't happen and he could not end up with a C2 if that was ultimate will of the council but this is going to be complicated very complicated could have to do with the order in which they're approved at the meeting even. Um, I've not encountered this before, but um, I I just want to bring that I'm not sure that really plays into your role here tonight. I though I would say that, you know, and those factors that you look at for resoning, you need to look at the current factors for what's included in that C2 rather than what the proposed factors would be because you're not guaranteed that would happen. And you know, it may sound strange, but you know, we we it doesn't really because of the timing, it doesn't change what you need to be looking at at this point. It may mood it, but it doesn't really change it. So, I I would encourage you not to look at what we think the council's going to do.

Have you received any feedback from adjacent neighbors about No, sir. staff. Also, typically when we're looking at commercial reszones, we look at suitability for development as well. Um, that's why we provided the contour map to you guys from the base map. Um, as well as checking with utilities. The site currently has no access to water or sewer. So, there's a chance that whatever is developed here will have to rely on its own individual septic system and well. Well, this is outside the POA, isn't it? Correct. Oh,

so it would need center water and we checked with Centerton and Centerton said they do not provide water to that side of the road at this time. But it is across the street. The shopping center has they serve the shopping center across the street, but this lot does not have access to Centerton at that time. At this time, but it's in their service area, right? They would not confirm if they would serve in the future either. No, no. I'm saying it's it's within their service area. In other words, they have the right to serve it. There's a there's a water service area map. Whether they're actually serving it, it's in their service area map. I'm just saying I could not get them to confirm that they would serve it in that.

Well, I'm the owner is probably going to have to bore under that highway to get to it is what I'm thinking would have to happen. But

um it's for me it's just it's a struggle setting everything aside and just looking at the schedule of uses. Um there are some things that is allowed by right if they can figure it out that wouldn't require a whole lot of water and sewer like auto sales and storage and stuff like that. That um gives me pause because I just wouldn't fit in that area at all. And unfortunately we're not allowed to ask the question of what's intended. we have to look at it as like anything that's permitted can be put there if they can meet all the other requirements. Um, and it's it's a struggle for me looking at some of the C2 uses that are allowed by ride. [Applause] It just doesn't feel like it fits with the home on either side.

That's the issue. Yeah. So anyways, I we haven't had our public hearing yet. So if you would just give us a minute to do our public hearing and then we'll call you back up to the podium and finish the discussion and and take action. All right. At this time, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. If there's anybody in the public that would like to address the commission concerning this request, please come up and state your name and address for the record, and we will give you up to five minutes to address the commission. One one at a time, please. You each get five minutes, but one at a time. Oh, you guys want to do it together? Come on, join it. But you guys only get five minutes between the two of you then. All right, cool.

My name is Darren Callahan. I live at 645 West Lashire Boulevard, the home adjacent to the right. Um, I don't know if any of you have looked at that property, but it's about a 25 30 foot ravine, almost the entire part of it. Um, how much fill are they going to bring in? What's that going to do for the runoff? my septic also. I mean, I like to say Bella Vista wasn't founded on community centers and shopping centers. People moved to Bella Vista because this is unlike any other place in the United States. You come here, you you live with in peace. There's a reason why we are one of the safest places to live in the United States. We don't have shopping centers and all of this stuff that brings people outside of Bella Vista into Bella Vista to be up to no good. And that's right in my dining room. And I don't think that there's anyone sitting up in front of me that would prefer to have a shopping center or something built right in their dining room window. Um, just had our first grandbaby this week. There's going to be children out there and I really don't want a business like that right in my front yard. The one across the road is fine. There's no houses that are blocked off by that. There is a road around the backside of that that is not in someone's yard. I just, you know, hope that everybody here would consider that there is anything that you would want 15 minutes down the road.

I hate to see Bella Vista start turning into Bentonville. The traffic there is really lovely. We all live in Bella Vista because we drive there to work. We don't want to live in that. That's all I got to say. Thank you. I just one of my concerns is our resale value of our house. if we have a business built that close to our home. So, it's already a unique house as it is and putting something like that would make it even worse, I think. So, if you could just state your name for the rep. Yes. And Jaclyn Callahan. I live at that house, 645 West Lancaster Boulevard. Thank you very much. Yes, sir.

Good afternoon. My name is Randy Kazaya. I live at 14892 Oakill Road. I'm on the opposite side of the uh the property we're discussing tonight. I will say that I'm not 100% against something going in there, but not knowing what it would be, I would have to say no because such as the the other residents, they don't want anything there. And I would say that most likely I'm not going to want anything either. So, not knowing exactly what they would do with such a a wide variety of things that would be allowed by the city, I would I would have to say I'm against it.

Thank you. Is there anybody else in the public that would like to address the commission concerning this request? All right, seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. if you would s come on back up to the podium. Uh we'll give you a chance to um make any additional statements based on hearing the public comment. If not um we'll take it back to the commissioners. Okay. Um really only one comment. Um property value. You got you got to address the commission. I'm sorry. Um

for the for the neighbors just for for what it's worth. Um, it doesn't affect property value. A commercial property going next door, uh, it's not a comparable. Properties are based on sales based on comparables. Uh, it does affect someone's desiraability. Maybe someone wouldn't want to live next door or maybe they work there, maybe they would like to live next door because that's where they work. So, just two cents. Other than that, it is what it is. So, uh, be great if, uh, you would uh, continue to consider it and approve it. But thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the commissioners? If if everybody would remember, we are just a recommending body to the city council. Ultimately, the city council is the one that will have to take action on those resoning requests. If with that being Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. Oh, you got to speak up and not raise your hand. It's hard for me to look to my left.

We always look that way. Um, and I understand that highest and best use is not a definitive choice when we're asked to do a reszone, but I think the chance that that parcel could or would ever be developed residential would probably be slim and nil. I think the most likely scenario is that the adjacent properties would also go commercial because that would make a whole commercial node there. And I do think and I'm very familiar with both of those properties having been in both of them. Um, if there were any commercial on this parcel, I feel that the largescale development plan would be a control that would adequately pro protect each of the neighbors as far as setbacks, tree retention, etc. should something commercial be built on this parcel. Any other questions or comments from the commissioners? If not, can I get a motion to recommend approval for reszoning 2025-59940 to the city council?

So move. Got a motion from Cleen. Second. Second from Sbury. Call the role, please. Cleen, no. Sedbury, no. Barner, no. Portillo, no. Wagman, no. Lloyd, yes. Ellis. No. So that Well, I don't know what happens next.

You can still appeal that on to the city council if you'd like to. Just go with a with a no recommendation from the planning commission. Sir. Okay. Thank Thank you very much. One attorney. May I ask question? Absolutely.

Um you mentioned everything may change in 30 days. Based on your knowledge of the workings, should we reintroduce this in 30 days or it would only get worse? Sure. I can help to I would just say generally that parcel as I said earlier parcel that you're concerned about as part of the comprehensive city that that is affect

and that should be in about 30 days or 60 days or no telling okay Okay, it's in the works. The appeal though has to be made within 30 days of today. Okay, so um and I would I would say this for commission knowledge if a new zoning code is adopted within the next month or two, then I believe that also will allow someone to come back. Yeah, the normal the normal oneyear freeze would not be in effect.

It might be worth your It might be worth your while to take some time, meet with your neighbors, meet with staff, and try to figure out something that might work for everybody. Okay. Excellent. Thank you all for your time. But

thank you. Uh, next up we have waiver 202560189. A waiver request of retaining wall setback requirements for an existing retaining wall located at three Buckingham Drive. Planner Hyatt. Right. Thank you. This property is located in the eastern area Bellista City limits and is lot 10 block 7 of the Buckingham subdivision. Uh section 107342E1 states retaining wall shall be placed a minimum of 10 feet or 1.5 times the height of the wall whichever is greater away from existing or proposed structures unless such wall is exempted under section 107-339 C2. And section 107342E2 states retaining wall shall be placed a minimum of 7.5 ft or 1.5 times the height of the wall whichever is greater away from all property lines. In cases where the retaining wall supporting an access drive, the wall should be allowed up to the front property line. Uh the applicant is requesting a waiver of retaining wall separation requirements for an existing log retaining wall. For the background, uh November 2023, a permit was submitted uh for a six-foot retaining wall, but the request did not meet separation requirements from the subject leech field or main structure. Uh, in December of 2022, staff was alerted to work being done at the subject site and adjacent lot with additional reports coming in the following month regarding trees being removed from the adjacent lot and being stacked on the subject lot. Uh, code enforcement was alerted at the time and reached out on February 9th of 2024, giving the property owners a 30-day notice uh, and to reach out to the planning staff. Code enforcement did not issue any citations. Uh but by April of 2024, the homeowners reached out to planning staff to set up a meeting. Uh staff met with one of the homeowners and walked through the violations of code and requested to meet with the contractor who performed the work. The contractor met with us and began work on obtaining an asbuilt survey and engineered designs. Uh the homeowners picked up those tasks and got documents submitted for this current cycle. Uh, per the engineered designs, the wall

consists of up to seven stack timber logs with the height of the wall varying from 1.36 feet to 6.1 ft sitting directly on top of three of the sight's five septic lines. Uh, the subject site is zoned R1 single family and Buckingham Drives and non-classified road per the master street plan. Um, as discussed in the work session meeting, uh, should PC approve this waiver, staff recommends the following condition, uh, that the applicant provide an alternate alternate field area on the adjacent lot, um, approved or provided by licensed designated representative in the state of Arkansas prior to permit issuance of the retaining wall. Should this wall cause failure of the existing septic system in the future?

All right, any questions for staff? So they own the adjacent lot as well. Correct. And you'll see up on the screen to the left lot nine. It already encro there there's already one lateral line out looks like that encroaches across the property line. Yeah. Correct. Okay.

Any other questions for staff? If not, the applicant would come up and state your name and address for the record and we'll give you an opportunity to add on to the staff report and see if we have any additional questions for you. Zach Smith. I live at 3 Buckingham Drive. Um, just maybe a little background on the project. We started this project um in September of 23 or maybe even like July of 23, we hired someone to build a flat area so we could have a playground for our um at the time we had a maybe a one and three year old. Now they're two and four. I don't my math's not great at the moment. They're two and four at one. Um so we wanted to have a place where we could put a playground and they started construction um of a just a small retaining wall that was not going to be very large or very structural. Um and then through the project we realized that the um larger retaining wall that was existing um was failing and our back deck was sinking. And so we asked him to look into that. And what we didn't realize at the time is that wall was built without approval from the city. And we didn't know that when we purchased the house. Um, and so it was leaking and there was moss growing on it. And um, at one point in time we could literally just grab a brick and just kind of pull it out. Like it was not doing very well and our deck was sinking. So we were concerned about um, our deck structure. It's a it's a raised deck. Um, so it's pretty I don't know 15 10 feet off the ground or so. Um, so we started that project and then he was working with the city to try to get it approved. And through somewhere during that process, he just stopped talking to us. And so I think he was talking to you potentially more than he was even talking to us. And anytime I did get him on the phone, he would talk about his family and random things for a long time, but not so much about the project. And then he just stopped responding and took our money. And we lost about $15,000 to him. And he just kind of left a bunch of mess in the yard. And then code enforcement came out because they didn't like that there was a big mess in the yard, but the person who was supposed to be working on it was

no longer showing up to our property to do the work that we had hired them to do. So, we kind of said, "Okay, I guess we can't wait to resolve this." We were trying to do take legal action against that person. Um, but we never followed through with it. We didn't really have a lot of exact recourse to get something out of them. So, upon hearing from code enforcement, we said, "Hey, we just need to figure something out." So, we tried to find a qualified contractor who could both work with the city to get something resolved as well as build what we needed in our backyard. Um, upon finding someone, we thought we had found a really someone who was really good and he said he would take care of things with the city and um get everything resolved and he did not do that. he just started construction and built the wall and then ever since then towards the end of the project was about the time that the at least the wall portion was being completed we got a stop work notice um for the work that was being done and then we've been work trying to work with the city ever since to get things resolved so kind of how we got to

any questions for the applicant seems like we need a list of contractors not to work with that would be great I did actually ask people and a lot of times people on climation will not provide such details which is also a challenge. Yeah. Do you have any issues with the the staff uh condition for approval of having an alternate leech field set aside for in the future if you do have any issues with your leech field? Uh I don't have a problem with that request other than maybe just needing some help to get it accomplished or like who to contact. If I get some of that information, I'd be happy to do it. Yeah, I think yeah, I think staff can give you some recommendations on who can help you out with that.

Okay, that'd be great. Any other comments, questions? If not, can I get a motion to approve waiver 202560189 with staff conditions? So moved. Got a motion from Sbury. Second. Second from Wagnen. Call the RO, please. Sedbury, yes. Barner, yes. Portillo, yes. Wangman, yes. Lloyd, yes. Leon, yes. Ellis, yes. All right, your waiver request is rep approved. Staff will get with you on what paperwork they need from you to finalize your permit and stuff like that. Thank you much. Thank you.

Uh next up we have uh minor subdivision 202560193, a proposed minor subdivision creating four new lots near K Drive, Planner Laroo. Right. So this property is located in the extreme southwest of Bella Vista and is currently designated as reserve property. Uh the applicant is requesting to split a single 27 acre parcel into four individual tracks. Uh the parcel is dissected by an existing section line which you uh do see on the zoning map. Um all tracks are designated with the required minimum 20 foot front and rear as well as the 7 and 12 side uh drainage and utility easements to be dedicated uh per this plat. Um the land uh is also designated as a neighborhood area in the future land use plan. Um and per the master street plan both Kerwal and Coven are classified as residential streets both maintaining 60 ft of rideway which does ex exceed the required minimum. Uh no new streets are proposed nor any vacated. All tracks have access to a public street and there is no increase in uh in city public services uh expected. Uh no substandard lots are created nor does any tract require a variance or a waiver. Granting of this lot split would not negatively impact the public health, safety and welfare of neighboring properties. There was no comment at the time of this report and there is also no outstanding technical comments. Staff is recommending approval of the minor subdivision.

All right. Any questions for staff? All right. Seeing none, is the applicant present? So, sir, if you'd come up and state your name and who you represent for the record, please. I'm Kent Burgerer representing Cooper Communities. Yes, sir. Do you have anything you'd like to add to staff report? Uh, we own uh two tracks at this location. um a smaller one and the the second tracks about 23 acres and are requesting to uh split it into three lots to make them more marketable. Any questions for the applicant? I'm looking to the left this time. No, sir.

All right. If not, can I get a motion to approve MSD 202560193? So move. Motion from Farner, second from Portillo. Call the role, please. Barner. Yes. Portilla, yes. Wagman, yes. Floyd, yes. Clesen, yes. Sedbury, yes. Ellis, yes. All right, you're approved and staff will get with you on the next step. Thank you. Uh, next up we have that closes our new business. Do we have anything for committee reports? Not at this time. Do we have anything for open discussion? Staff does not have anything at this time.

Does any commissioners have anything for open discussion? I have one.

We had talked previously about requiring some kind of a survey certification so we did not continue to have issues with homes being built inside of setbacks. Where did we get with that conversation? That conversation ended with requiring a certification for elevation and placement should the proposed plan that is approved basically go to the fullest extent of the request which we are exercising almost on a daily basis. Um but that's typically for the elevation of the driveway grade not placement of the house. We are not requiring a certified um asbuilt for every single permit that we issue.

I'm not asking for an asbuilt, just some surveyor to say it's in the right spot. Because I I'm it's not I don't think it's fair for people to keep coming back and saying, "Well, the building department signed off on my foundation, so I'm good to go." I and it it was tough listening to a guy who said he's built over 300 homes to not realize he was in the wrong spot. and his only excuse was staff and I we're not signing off on that. I mean, we we go and give them an approval, but we're not inspecting against but that's the same thing we hear every single time. It's a problem for sure. No doubt about it. And it's it's uh it needs to be addressed in some way. Do we need a new ordinance?

I I wouldn't go that far as to say that. Um, I think probably some it could be some administrative things in terms of review that could be done internally. I don't want to speak for your department. I don't know. But I mean, the rule is is the rule. I mean, we just got to figure out how to get people to follow it. Um, that's kind of the problem.

It's to be more cognizant of what's happening out in the field is the situation. We're not building to what's approved. It it falls on that. We approve something, we work with the builder to get them to propose something that meets code. it makes it through permitting and the problems will pop up halfway through the build just to make sure that the builder knows what they are building is what was approved on the plan. Um that's essentially what almost any issue that we have comes up with is

yeah but I mean we have qualified people on staff that can look at the electrical rough and say that's not right that doesn't meet the code we've got to fix this. we have they can look at the plumbing they can look at the framing they are not licensed surveyors who with their eye can say yep it encroaches five feet into the setback there there's only one way to get that done but we keep I mean and that's what our building division won't touch because they are not and they should I would just say that it is that if

I mean if if you're the owner or you're the contractor how easy is it to get the plot pinned and to take a tape measure and make sure they're going to pour the concrete in the right place. And I otherwise my hundreds of thousands of dollars and investment are going to go down the toilet because I can't build a house in the right spot. You know, they take a tre they are taking a tremendous amount of and I you know the the previous example I don't know whose I don't want to assign blame. I don't know whose fault it was, but you know, we've had scenarios where they say, "Oh, just just move it this way a little bit. we'll make rent, you know, all that kind of stuff.

Yeah. And I know that happens all the time to cut down on a course or block or whatever the case may be. And that's that's why I'm just saying, hey, if we get if we ask for not a as surveyor, but just a just a h, you know, written letter sent by a surveyor that says this house is in the right spot. I mean, it's it all comes back to who's going to be responsible for it. And and I mean right now and no nor ever should our staff be be the reason why or an excuse for a violation like this.

And the builders do sign a certification at the time of building application that they assume all responsibility for location of the structures and that they release staff from any kind of liability of locating anything. Yeah. It says building inspector specifically shall not be responsible for locating or helping you locate the structure on your property. That's the sole responsibility of the building. That's not going to mean a hill of beans when he gets the paperwork for the lawsuit that's coming. It will. It No, it will. It will. But it's not going to stop me from having to defend that lawsuit. Well, well, the you know, I think I view it as more of a proactive approach. I've got a house that's built in a setback. I'm not going to wait around for them to sue us and say we didn't do something right. I'm going to enforce against them. Yeah.

And we need to make sure that, you know, first of all, build, you know, COS are denied. Uh and then uh we need to get active and we are getting more active in our enforcement go to court and then you know find them every day that get the house is not torn down and back out of that out of that city. Well I I'm just I was and we do that it won't take long for people to understand we got to make sure this house is when when did we find out that that house was in the wrong spot? That was the summer. It was July, wasn't it? And he continued to work on it for two months. after he was aware of the situation through the end of the month, I believe.

He said July 4th or somewhere in that neighborhood is when Carol Electric told them they had a problem and they kept building for two months. But they had no response as to why it happened. Well, no, his letter said exactly why it happened. His surveyor transposed two numbers when he was laying it out. I'm just going by comments. Well, it's it's set in the it's said in the narrative back to my prior state. Oh, yeah. There there's there's a reason why they carry liability insurance, too. I I like I said, it's we we've talked a lot about asking the asking for forgiveness variances, which I don't want staff to have to deal with anymore. They have to.

We need to get out of that all together. Yeah. I think it would would be nice if staff reminded us when those things come up that those people are told on the front end it's their responsibility. Yeah. Would be a good idea to remind us of that. Yeah. I I I didn't know that that was on the permit. So every application specifically, you know, the building code itself says that basically if you get approved but it's still not the code, that's no forgiveness. You still got to follow the code and it doesn't prevent us from enforcement. So it always people building and the applicant. Yeah.

Just out of curiosity, if you required a engineered staking for the location of the survey, not engineer survey or licensed surveys, right? But it's part of it. Is that a is that a change to the code or could that be an administrative policy?

What we're doing right now from the last time that we had a situation like this pop up is an administrative change policy through the building official policy in his authority through the building code. So, we currently have a building official policy that requires this FFE certification at the time if they request for if they, for example, if someone wants a 14% driveway grade, that's the max. You have no room for error. And so, we require uh we a stamped signed certification of the uh block wall at that time of the elevation. So, that is uh it's probably been over a year ago that we had this conversation at this point. Um that's that was the outcome of that because requiring it for every single house that we have was deemed as too burdensome based on the current workload of not only staff but the surveyors that are in this area after talking with them and so the building official um did not adopt that policy.

I'll tell you this working I got one today that um they gave me a survey of it and it was a foot and a half higher than what they had. they'd have their driveway at 23% and y'all would have seen it in six months. But now they're going to rework their block and get it within code. So, I mean, we we are we are but it's just for those ones that are at the full the they're they're at the max and if they get it wrong,

it's not going to be within compliance. So, um, it's working so far and probably out of 10 I get I may get one that isn't, you know, correct. But really having every house that's built require a surveyor a surveyor that they're having a hard time getting them just a topo and I just don't think it's practical, okay,

to require that for every build because a lot of them they're not right on the setback. they're, you know, five or six feet, 10 feet off because it isn't, you know, their lots deep enough and it doesn't matter as much and they would be required to do it also when it really doesn't apply to them. Okay. I I will ask then if we're not going to do that, as soon as we know there's an issue, can we please issue a stop work order so they quit working? We did that with the last one. I understand that. But like I mean if if the stop work order doesn't doesn't take place and let's refer it over to the city attorney and law enforcement to deal with it in a in a more

stronger way because it's not it's not good and that work did stop on that other project. Oh and then things got really about getting some resolution done. So bring it to a head. Yeah. It didn't work in that fashion. But when you're talking about criminal fines, if you continue to violate a stop work order, that that might get a builder of attention, but we've got to refer it over to the city attorney then. Okay. So, you want to go home? I want to go home.

Oh, good. Great. I'm the one that's want to go home. I got to drive a Plano tomorrow morning. All right. Anyways, that anything else for open discussion? If not, city council work session will be on Monday, September 15th at 5:30 p.m. The regular meeting will be on Monday, September 22nd at 6 PM. Our next planning commission work session is scheduled for Thursday, October 2nd at 4:30 p.m. with the board of zoning adjustments meeting on Monday, October 13th at 4:30, followed by our planning commission regular meeting. Both of which I will not be here for. Mr. We can handle it. You can handle it. So with that, we stand adjourned. Thanks staff for putting that together for us tonight. Appreciate your work.