City Council - Regular Meeting

on a agenda item. We do have a QR code or a signup sheet that you can utilize for us. If you want to speak on an item that's not on the agenda, you can also sign up to do that as well. I don't see anybody running to

no expected work. Do that. With that, I will polish to order. Welcome to the Bentonville April 14th city council meeting. And I don't believe we have a a gather this morning or this evening. So, if you'll please stand with me for the pledge of allegiance and remain standing for a moment of silence. We appreciate that.

I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Call please. Sanchez here. Patterson here. Here. Here. Sudter here. Richardson. Burkhart here. Hook

here. A motion to approve the minutes of the March 10th, 2026 and March 31st, 2026 meeting. Second. A motion and a second. Patterson, yes. Yes. Yes. Sitter, yes. Yes. Hook. Yes. Sanchez, yes. Mr. Sweder, would you like to make a motion? Make a motion to suspend the rules requiring ordinances be read on three separate days. Further move all ordinances and resolutions be read by their title only. Second, yes. Zeba, yes. Yes. Bart, yes. Hook, yes. Sanchez, yes. Patterson,

yes. At this time, I'll open the committee up the whole and I turn it over to press, future chair. Okay. Is there any business before the committee or we can entertain a consent agenda? Anybody heard from that? I haven't heard that. Thank you.

Okay. Um, I would propose a consent agenda items number three, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and utility board item number one.

Okay. So, move I can reread them. Yes. Item number three, four, five, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and utility board one. Is anybody here to speak on any of these? I don't believe so. I think that planning. Okay, perfect. There's a motion and second. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Patterson. Yes.

Yes. Hey, mayor. I'll yield back to you. Okay. And we'll open with new business. On planning on items n ordinance adopting 19 and 20. Are those not the same? You want to wait till we You said nine or 19. 19 and 20. Looks like it's on there twice. They look like downtown neighborhood. Oh, since downtown center is the second. Yeah, there's two different neighborhoods. Oh, two different ones. Okay.

Okay. We will open with new business and we have a proclamation for public safety telecommunicator week and so we like to bring in our telecommunicator team. I'll read the proclamation and then have them come forward. Proclamation reads as this. Whereas emergencies can can occur at any time that require police, fire, emergency medical services. And whereas when an emergency occurs, the prompt response of police officers, firefighters, and paramedics is critical to the protection of the life and preservation of property. And whereas the safety of our police officers and firefighters is dependent upon the quality and accuracy of information obtained from citizens who telephone the city of Bentonville Emergency Communication Center. And whereas the Bentonville Emergency Communication Center in the last year handled 110,840 telephone calls and dispatched 59,459 total police and fire EMS calls for service. And whereas public safety telecommunicators are the first and most critical contact our citizens have with emergency services. And whereas public safety telecommunicators are the single vital link for our police officers and firefighters by monitoring their activities by radio, providing them information and ensuring their safety. And whereas public safety telecommunicators of the city of Bentonville have contributed substantially to the apprehension of criminals, suppression of fires, and treatment of patients. And whereas each dispatcher has exhibited compassion, understanding, and professionalism, professionalism during the performance of their job in the past year. Now, therefore, I, Stephanie Orman, mayor of the city of Bentonville, do hereby proclaim the week of April 12th through 18th, 2026 as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas, in honor of the men and women whose diligence and professionalism keep our city and citizens safe. All right, I'm sorry.

real. Thank you. Thank you. We appreciate you very much. the side. Right here.

Oh, I don't I will say on behalf fire chief and I I mean we can't do our job without our telecommunicators. They are the ones that are answering the phone during a crisis. They're the first one trying to work through the problem while getting us the information. So, we have 27 men and women in our telecommunication center uh that do police, fire, and EMS 24 hours. So, and they also handle a lot of other phone calls in the city because a lot of people when they need something, that's the first line they pick up. And so, I I will just say we appreciate all the work you guys do. Uh we really do. And uh again, the support from the city council, mayor's office has been great. So, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. We have one more proclamation tonight, the National Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week. So, we'll bring that team. Is that We have some of those members out there as well. There they are. Okay.

All right. Read the proclamation and we'll have you guys send forward for a photo. Whereas the National Animal Care and Control Association has designated April 12th through 18th, 2026 as National Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week. And whereas animal control officers and animal care staff are dedicated to helping pets and people in the community every day. And whereas various federal, state, and local government officials throughout the country take this time to recognize, thank and commend all animal control officers and animal care staff for the dedicated services they provide to the citizens, public safety, and public service agencies across the nation. And whereas animal control officers and animal care staff provide essential functions to the city pertaining to animal welfare and care, safeguarding public health through disease prevention and enforcement and educating the public on responsible pet ownership for our community. And whereas the city of Bentonville recognizes and commends the work done by the employees of the Bentonville Animal Services and specifically recognize the following employees for the many dedicated and long hours of service they perform in providing the highest and most efficient level of customer service to the residents of the community. Shannon Gabard, Tyler Shambles, Logan Weber, Emily Karns, Kristen Teague, and Kim Roberts. Now therefore I Stephanie Orman, mayor of the city of Bentonville, do hereby proclaim the week of April 12th through 18th, 2026 as National Animal Control Officer Appreciation Week in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas in honor of the men and women whose diligence and professionalism keep our city and citizens safe and animals. We need to change that.

Thank you. you.

So, we have a great group of people. We actually added one person recently. Sky Brown has come on as a new animal services officer. Logan Weber, Tyler Shambles, do a phenomenal job for the city. They have a heart for this work. Um, it's really intangible to try to describe how much care they put into the work they do. They truly uh want to be where they're at. They want to do this work and I'm so proud of them. So, that's what makes that department work. Um, I'm just lucky to be working with them. So, thank you all for supporting them and supporting our role. Thank you. I just want to say thank you for your um reports that you sent over.

I know sometimes it gets mundane and it's just another checklist, but I certainly appreciate that. Well, thank you. I just I'll try to change a couple. No, it's fine. No, I just appreciate being kept in the loop. So, thank you for your time. They continue to do a great job of returning animals microchipped. So, we'll do the plug for the microchipping so that um we can hopefully not have the animals make it to the shelter. We can get them back to their home. So, thank you all.

Okay, items three, four, and five are on consent agendas. Do we need to read all of our We need to actually pass the consent agenda and read all of them. So, um you want to lead with that?

Okay. New business item number three, a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to enter into an agreement for the purchase of an evidence storage system from Patterson Poke, Inc. in the amount of $159,64.84 and further purposes. New business item number four, a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to enter into a three-year agreement with Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. in the amount of $180,900 for citywide GIS software and for the purposes. New business item number five, a resolution extending the temporary display of artworks titled Hawkville Crag and War Bluff by photographer Tim Ernst on public property in Bentonville City Hall at no cost to the city and for the purposes. New business item number seven in the city council for the city of Bentonville, Arkansas. New business item number eight in the city council for the city of Bentonville, Arkansas. New business item number nine in the city council for the city of Bentonville, Arkansas. New business item number 10 and the city council for the city of Bentonville, Arkansas. New business item number 11 in the city council for the city of Bentville, Arkansas. New business item number 12 in the city council for the city of Bentville, Arkansas. New business item number 13, appointment of Becky SA as exe officio to the active transportation advisory board.

Yay. Mhm.

New business item number 14, a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to enter into an agreement with your total fitness shop in the amount of $17,392.13 for the purchase of fitness equipment at the Bentonville Community Center and further purposes. New business item number 15, a resolution authorizing the remittance of sales tax on the purchase of two robotic mowers in the amount of $4,689.35 and further purposes. New business item number 16, a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to enter into a contract with industrial truck equipment for the purchase of a 2026 cab and chassis in the amount of $120,978 and further purposes. New business item number 17, a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to sign a quick claim deed to Lraine LLC and further purposes. New business item number 18, a resolution authorizing certain city departments to dispose of property rendered worthless by damage or prolonged in the landfill or by other available means and for other purposes. Utility board item number one, a resolution authorizing the mayor and city clerk to pay the sales tax on the purchase of a heavy duty forklift from Whis in the amount of $10,339.80 and further purposes. Second

motion and a second roll call, please. Sitter. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Mayor, can you submit for your own rebate? Your own rebate. Yeah. Yeah. If you do, mayor, mayor, I just want to note that uh item number

very lost five, which is the continuation of a display of artwork that we have in the city. It is so beautiful, so nice that we were even able to put it on the consent agenda. It didn't have to go for a specific vote. Been in in display for quite some time as well. That's that we put it in there. Yes, we're appreciative of Mr. S. Okay. I will go to item number uh six, which is a public hearing and ordinance vacating an alley rightway.

Business item number six, an ordinance vacating alley rightway located between lot 76 and lot 174 of original town of Bentonville, subdivision of the city of Bentonville, Arkansas, Benton County, Arkansas. VA6 VAC26-00004. This time I will open the public hearing. There's anyone online or in uh person to speak on the item, please come forward. Seeing and hearing none, I will close the public hearing. Then I can move the item. Thank you very much. So I move the item

a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Yes. Patterson. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Items 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 and 18 were on a utility board. Item one was on consent agenda. So, we'll go to planning item number one, which is a lot split lot 3 through five of Little Osage Farms Edition.

Planning item number one, an ordinance accepting a lot split of lot one of Little Osage Farms addition creating new lots 3-5 of Little Osage Farms addition to the city of Bentonville, Arkansas. And for other purposes, project number LS26-00002. A motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Sanchez. Yes. Patterson. Yes. Yes. Yes. S. Yes. Item number two is a final plat of Walmart campus subdivision phase 21.

Planning. Item number two, an ordinance accepting a final plat of lot one of Walmart campus subdivision phase 21 to the city of Bentville, Arkansas. and for other purposes. Project number FP25-000010. Motion in a second. Any other roll call, please? Yes. Yes. Patterson, yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Item number three is a property line adjustment lot 33 block six of Fair Heights edition. Planning item number three, an ordinance accepting a property line adjustment of lots 13-16 block 6 of Fair View Heights Edition, creating new lot 33 block 6 of Fairview Heights Edition to the city of Bentonville, Arkansas. And for the purposes, project number PLA25-000016. Motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Sanchez, yes. Yes. Yes. SA yes s yes yes yes

item number four is a lot split of lot 42 of Clark's edition planning item number four an ordinance accepting a lot split of lot three of Clark's edition creating new lot 42 of Clark's edition to the city of Bentonville Arkansas and for other purposes project number LS26-00005 a motion and a Second prop please yes yes yes yes yes yes yes item number five is a lot split of lots one and two at plumbley's place

planning item number five an ordinance accepting a lot split of parcel 01-08215-1000 creating new lots 1 and two of Plumbley's Place to the city of Bentonville, Arkansas and for their purposes project number LS25-000038. Motion in second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Yes. S Sanchez, yes. Patterson, yes. Item number six is a reszoning from R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN4 downtown mixeduse residential.

Planning item number six, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 low density single family residential to DN4 downtown mixeduse residential and further purposes project number RZ26-00008. Second motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Item number seven is a reszoning from R1 lowdensity single family to DN3 downtown highdensity residential. Planning item number seven, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential and further purposes project number RZ26-00009. A motion and effect. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Sudter, yes. Bart, yes. Hook, yes. Sanchez, yes. Patterson. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Item number eight is a reszoning from R1 lowdensity single family to DN3 downtown highdensity residential. Planning item number eight, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential and for their purposes project number RZ26-000010. So move. Second. A motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Bart, yes. Yes. Sanchez, yes. Patterson, yes. Avery, yes. Yes. Sitter, yes.

Item number nine is a resoning from R1 loy single family to DN3 downtown high density residential. Planning item number nine, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential and for the purposes project number RZ26-000011. So move second a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Item number 10 is a resoning from R1 low density single family residential to DN3 downtown high density res residential. Planning item number 10 an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential. And for the purposes project number RZ26-000012. So move second a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Item number 11 is a uh reszone from R1 lowdensity single family to DN3 downtown highdensity residential. Planning. Item number 11, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential and for other purposes. Project number RZ26-000013 motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Sanchez, yes. Patterson, yes. Yes. SA, yes. Sitter, yes. Art. Yes. No.

You went uh six. Yes. One. No. Just being consistent with my past votes. Unlucky. Fine. We just said that we would restate any. Oh, okay. I unanimous. So to make sure everybody just reported. So yeah, I item number 12 is a resoning from um R1 low density single family residential to DN3.

Planning item number 12, an or an an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 low density single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential. And for other purposes, project number RZ26-0014. Second with a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Patterson, yes. A yes. Eva, yes. Sudter, yes. Yes. No. Sanchez, yes.

Six. Yes. One, one. Item number 13 is a reszoning from R1 low density single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential. Planning item number 13 and ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to DN3 downtown highdensity residential and for the purposes project number RZ26-000015. Second a motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Zeba, yes. Sudter, yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Patterson. Yes. Passes unanimously. Item number 14 is a resoning from R1 low density single family to R2 medium density family and town home residential. Planning item number 14, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of R1 lowdensity single family residential to R2 medium density two family town home residential and for the purposes project number RZ26-0016. So move second motion then a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Sitter. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Item number 15 is a resoning from A1 agricultural to C3 mixeduse commercial. Planning item number 15, an ordinance changing real estate in the city of Bentonville, Arkansas from its present zoning classification of A1 agricultural to C3 mixeduse commercial. And for other purposes, project number RZ26-000020. Second. Motion and second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Yes. Yes. Yes. Sanchez, yes. Patterson, yes. Yes. Yes.

Item number 16 is a resolution approving a development agreement for the central and battlefield project. We do have three individuals signed up to speak on this item.

I also concerns about this talk. There were two things on in the agreement that I don't think the constituents understand that it just they need some assurances. I think we do too that not only are we going to deal with the traffic issue, but we will work with the state to be sure that those monies that we are taking in are spent to take care of the traffic modifications. We're not going to use them for anything else. the language is a little soft on that, but that we do need to work with the state if there's any approvals of any kind of engineering issues or whatnot that we need to make any corrections on central and that tends to be you know it could take the state years to do anything about it and we have control over some of that. I just think it would be helpful to have some assurances that before we issue an occupancy certificate that the city will make sure that we deal with the traffic issues on central and in the areas that we have partnered with the developer to deal with. Well, I mean, I've done a lot of research on this because obviously it um affects my um ward, but I mean, as you read the agreement, basically it's wide open. So, the improvements could actually be at Moberly and um East Central, which does not help this particular project at all because they're we're still not going to be able to get out on Battlefield and they're certainly not going to be able to get out of Battlefield. Two years ago, I heard, "Oh, nobody's going to use Battlefield from a city employee because everybody was going to go 8th Street." Well, we know how that's working out to

go to the home office because 8th Street is now backed up. People are going to use the path of lease resistance, which is Battlefield because 8th Street already has its own issues with people either trying to get on to 49. I mean, it's backed up all the way to the roundabout basically. So, um, that I mean a roundabout at Central Moverly is great, but that doesn't address the problem that we have at this moment. This traffic study that was supposedly done is no new news to us that a huge home office has now opened and traffic has only quadrupled. Um because when the traffic study was done, the home office was actually still on 8th Street and so we've got bigger issues at an F intersection and then to put high density literally on the size of a postage stamp. Um it it's just going to be a nightmare with no guaranteed traffic solution. There's there's no guaranteed traffic solution as of today. will solve the traffic issues at that area.

But the city doesn't have the money. The thing is, if I understand it correctly, we had a meeting about this several months ago when we went through all this, but this is not the only development contributing to traffic in that area. You just mentioned Walmart Home Office contribute. We didn't charge them anything for roads. We've not charged anyone else for roads. Whether we approve this or don't approve it, the traffic's going to get worse the next day, the next month, six months. But if we add more, it's going to get worse.

But we have a developer who's willing to give us three million or however many dollars it is to try to solve the problems, which is quite generous, I would say. And I doubt they'll be the last developer that we have that we'll collect a fee from in that area. And we've already approved. So the next development down the road, we don't charge them, too. We only approved the project if we had two roundabouts, but we don't have two roundabouts. So basically not approved.

But we're we're the ones that came up with the city, if I understand correctly, the city came up with the idea of roundabouts to solve the traffic problem. Doesn't mean they'll ever be built. The state might not agree to it. The future development might dictate it, might not. I mean, that's a But we've kind of got it reversed. We're getting $3 million from a developer to help us solve the problem, not the city being on the hook for without them, we're on the hook for all of it. But if we put $3 million at a roundabout, they're the only developer on that corner and Moly, it's not helping. That will help solve the this solution. No, because we we won't be able to get out. Yeah. And and use it could help solve the problem for that purpose. But I mean, it would help us get money.

It'll help move traffic further along. the free to you money but it doesn't solve the problem of the development that we had already identified two years three years ago because so if if we do nothing we're still stuck with the same roads and the same traffic and the same problems and zero dollars. We have no we have no more money than we have now. Well, if other developments come in, this is a development already here. They're here to help. But but we somehow got on the hook of that we would pay for part of it for anything. We never Yeah. We have to pay for our part of it. If we don't want to. Well, then we don't solve the problem. Then if we're not going to Well, a stoplight might do just as good.

Exactly. But we need to commit to something before we issue the occupation. But if you remember back, I mean, I'm sure if we said put in a roundabout, they would put in a roundabout. We're the ones saying we don't know what this is going to look like. So, they're giving us a big pot of money instead to do whatever we need to do down the road once we have a little bit more knowledge of what that area is going to look like. And that seems like a good idea. Then we can do whatever is best at that time once we kind of know more. It seem to me that seems like a win to get we already know that we need to mitigate the traffic issues at that location. We need the money from the development.

And I am not saying turn the money down. I'm just saying put something in there that says the city will make sure this happens before we issue the but this money could go all the way to Mollum like it can go anywhere. It doesn't We're in charge. We're in charge ofations through that. We are in charge of appropriations on a project of this size. Will we allow the money to go elsewhere? No. Yes. We don't have to. We have contract.

No, no, no, no, no. I'm talking about if the city fe gets the fee in lie of we're in charge of voting where that money goes. If they bring up something in the project the budget go to go somewhere else we can deny that either it goes for this intersection or it doesn't or to rectify the traffic problem at this juncture where they're all coming together. Everybody recognizes this. I would before I make my my comments I would like to hear from the applicant.

Sure. and and get their get their take on this. Uh this has been a long ongoing years endeavor to get here. Uh we've gone through everybody I know the mayor's gone through it. Everybody's gone through a lot of back and forth. The agreement's grown the amount that the developers will I'd like to just hear a little bit about this directly from the party that's been contributable to that to that agreement if you don't if that's all right. I'm not asking to change the intent. I'm just saying let's make the language just a little more explanatory and specific to some asurances that we're going to have this done before they open before we issue interesting.

That could mean putting up a temporary stoplight. I mean, it doesn't mean we're going to build around, but I'm just saying that we need to commit to having something resolved before we add more traffic to that location. I think that's inherently our responsibility. But

so is it okay? I'm sorry. Go ahead. The change that Cindy is requesting, it is something that goes on us. It is against us as you mentioned. So we are putting it there to give us freedom to do whatever it is necessary. Whatever we do is going to be for the benefit of this section of the of the city. That's what it is going to be. And if it is not, as Bill mentioned clearly, it is not going to happen because we are going to stop it because we have the understanding that this money is going to be dedicated for this particular area of the city where the traffic as it is today is bad and and if we don't allow any if you don't if nothing happens, it's going to get worse. On the other hand, if the developer were allowed at this moment to continue building, he will to start building, he will use the $3 million that uh he's given to or he or she is given to us. He will use it right now in order to to build whatever has been determined that it is necessary for that. But it is not happening because the city does not have the corresponding funds to complete the rest of the stuff and because the city does not have a plan a complete comprehensive plan that includes other developments to the east of the town. So because of that

too early for them to to be this this is the best deal that allows the city to keep the money for future development that we the city council are going to make sure that benefit this particular area in which Holly live and I live in the vicinity. So there there is obviously a a serious interest on our part to fix those problems, traffic problems in that area and we are responsible for determining what is going to happen with those $3 million. Are we going to build a fountain next to the airport? No, it's not going to happen. Are we going to build a traffic light or a roundabout or an airplane transportation or something somewhere else

or whatever? We are going to do something in order to improve the traffic. The developer could at this moment start building and build the roads as they were ex determined, but the city doesn't have the money in the budget to complete the process. So, it doesn't make sense. We better get the money today and let the developer do the the developer the development inside his property and then we'll continue the fixing the the traffic problems that will be aggregated perhaps with the developments on the west on the east side of the property that we don't know about at this moment. So we get this

our benefits so that when those future developments come which we know are coming we can actually take the whole thing into account and do the right thing instead of doing the wrong thing and it not working and we're in the same position as we are right now. Right now we have an F. We might make it an A until something else comes. Whereas if we have the flexibility when that comes then we have the opportunity to make it the right thing for the entire area. I'm not asking that we take any of that away, but I'm just saying you're asking us a minor change, a minor language piece in two of the areas on there that gives some asurances that we are going to fix the problem

before we dump more traffic on there. It doesn't have to be the permanent solution. So, are you asking for assurances from this council? For the council that there is assurances that while we approve this development, we're going to we're going to accept this and work together to do this, but we're going to put some kind of timeline on it. I think it's in the contract. And I think also we can we can provide reasonable assurance that we will do our best, but we can't obligate ourselves to spending anything right now. I mean,

we can be like the state and say, you know, in 15 years they may do something with Central. We all know that they agree there's a pro gonna be a problem on central, but we have no idea when that's going to be future developments to the same standard and get as much money from private development to contribute to the public streets as possible and that's the only way to solve the problem. I would I would just and again I've asked Mr. Watkins to come up here. I would just say that in the last several years, the developer has acted in good faith, right?

And it's been challenging for all because we we we know that typically in a development they go do what's only their responsibility, but it falls short for what we know that's going to happen down the road. So they've been engaged in all these conversations and the goalpost has moved several times and so I believe that they've they've stayed in the good faith and they're they're they've agreed to our final deal. Our final deal, not theirs. Theirs was probably a couple million ago. Uh but they've agreed to our final deal after a year now of negotiations and uh we're now here finally resolving this one issue for somebody that's been trying to get this property moving forward now for well I don't know three years

so three years top of all the other expenses we've added that's correct we've added we've added quite a bit both sewer and other things that weren't on the initial thought process for the devel developer. We've added all that uh both the lines they have to run and contribute to plus new capacities and everything else going on. So, this is a big uh this is a big moment for them. They've stepped up and I and if you don't give yield anything to if y'all allow his him to speak on the agreement itself.

Thank you, Council Bernard. Council members, I hope I can address and com give you some comfort with some of the language that's already in the contract. Let's deal first with the city's ability to take the money and go somewhere else with it. That's addressed in several location several places in the contract. I'll begin in paragraph 3A in the middle of it. The city may apply this fee and loo toward construction of the improvements identified herein as its as its responsibility to the fee and ll improvements which are the components of the fee and loo or to other public infrastructure providing comparable public benefit. Further down in that same paragraph if now that if word is real important in this sentence if as a result of alternative traffic solutions arising as a part of other developments. That's a nice way of trying to say if the hospital comes up with a plan that's better than this one, any part of the fee if as a result of that any part of the fee and ll improvements are not constructed by the city, the city may retain the fee and loo or any part thereof. They y'all only get to keep the money and there's only a chance that it would get diverted to something else if the hospital comes up with another plan. I I would expect that you're not going to ask them to pay for 100% of whatever they do this. going to need this $3 million to help them construct whatever uh plan they put in place. The same language appears on page three, paragraph B2D. The city reserves the right not to construct the roundabout or traffic light if there's that word again. Alternative traffic solutions are implemented and therefore retain the fee inls again. Page four, paragraph E. The city reserves the right to not construct the battlefield roundabout if alternative traffic solutions are implemented and to retain the fees in lie in such event. You know, I guess we could have gotten there and said if the hospital puts in a roundabout that solves this problem, you can keep the money and use it toward

that. It might be some other developer if you got y'all are going to be required to build this plan that's attached as a exhibit to the contract unless and only unless the hospital comes in with something else and in which case you can take our money and use it for your share of that. Uh as far as the existence of city funds to do this I remind you that the stuff on battlefield you've already got the money for. It's part of the bond project for part of the uh the um drainage infrastructure bond that you passed. Now I you know I'm all for something that says that the city will get this stuff done in a in a good prompt time as Miss Acri has has suggested. However, it's got to be tied to my client's construction schedule. It doesn't make sense if prompt time is a year after my client's finished or why would you why would you hurry along and do it a year before my client's ready for I think it needs to be tied to my client's schedule. And that's how it's already set up in the contract just to be logical about it. So, I hope that's addressed some of your concerns. I'll be happy to address whatever other questions you have. But

the money um has to be given at what point in time and when will construction start? Uh the money has to be tendered. What's the language, Tyler? Uh, prior to the pre-construction meeting, for construction on the front end. Prior to precon, I'm sorry, the plan for construction.

Ryan, I think if we got approved tonight, be a year, year and a half before you start construction and then a three or four year construction timeline. So, it's some time before it would be completed. And by the way, there's the money that's in here has nothing to do with your sewer uh impact fees. That's going to be an additional five plus million dollars that my client will have to pay for this project in sewer impact fees.

We're all this money would be given at precon, but we would have an additional four years to raise the funds or another alternative traffic plan come up from another party. four years to raise the money or come up with other funds from other sources. That's the more realistic likelihood be a little detailed, not specific, but just I tied it to occupancy or whatever, which doesn't give you a date or deadline, but I don't want to see the improvements going years after this development opens. I don't think that that's going to benefit the constituents. Yeah. In terms of what concern, that is not on the developer. That is not on the developer. It is our past. So why do

we commit?

Why do we have to commit ourselves to something that we don't even know what it is when we have the flexibility to use it in the best possible manner as the time comes and as the information is available for everything that we need. In the meantime, we get the money that we free the the developer from doing whatever they need to do inside their property and outside the the parcel. It is the city's responsibility do to do whatever it is necessary and it is convenient at the time not today because today we don't know what it is the best solution. If we knew the solution and then we'll be asking them to do whatever they need to in order for them to comply with this requirement but we don't know at this moment. So it is the best for us to take the money uh and and then have the freedom because changing the contract or changing this agreement does not affect them. It is only us who will be affected by any change in the language. So we don't need to change anything because we are responsible for ourselves for the betterment of the city. So we don't need to change anything. It is just like that the best freedom that we can have do whatever it is needed in order to fix the traffic problem when the information is available and the funds are available and everything is in place up we'll do something but we may not get it done

but we have five we'll have five years but when I met with the people uh that are representing the hospital I said I gave them this complete scenario and they said why are we even in this conversation he was like if you put round us there. We're not going to pull them up. Like he he's goes, "Of course, everybody wants us to pay for everything." That was their exact words. We can require them to pay for that's within our jury. But we should we can't require them to pay for these two roundabouts. Why not? Can I ask you a question? Can I ask Bill directly? It's on this developer, not them. It's a city problem. Well, we we've made it this developer's problem. It's everybody's problem.

Let me just ask you a question. So the exhibit in the in the agreement which represents what we intend or you or the city intends to build as our traffic alternative that's shown in the exhibit. Right. Only if we come up with as a city an alternative solution will that change. Correct. So we have something that we can plan for. We have how much in the how much do we have currently in the bond fund for that street? No, more than that. There's about 14. And that's we have about 14 in the bond fund to fix the drainage that I mean that was for the original design which was before the two roundabouts. So we have that um

I just want to finish if I could. So we have 14 million there. We never did the drainage fix that we have to do which that's in the bond funding that fixes in that.

Right. But now that we have somebody to help us defer some of that cost and it's been redesigned. So that money is all can go all this is going to go to fixing that and its drainage right there. So we now are up to $17 million right now with funds available in hand. That's getting pretty close. So we have four years to work it out in our budget to make up any shortfall. And I we know the exhibit that we're supposed to build unless somebody comes with something else better.

I think that's false though because I have heard from our city we are not interested in putting money into private development improvement. It's not a private not private. This is a this is our a road in an intersection that's already F. This was an F when we talked about it. That's a different intersection. That's Mland Central. We're talking Battlefield and Battlefield has been the same. We had the same discussion two three years ago when we first started talking and that's why we said if we have two roundabouts they can build it. So who we have made a developer agreement saying if you give us this that's your total cost. It was lower before now it's where it's at to building it.

And so we are taking responsibility by taking this money that the rest is on us. We that's different discussion. What we let me just what we were hoping is that we could bring a design in front of you when this came through. That's why we had asked to wait till we could get it done. We don't have a design that we want to put in front of you at this point that we think handles everything that's coming there. We are working on it. I have in fact wrote

a grant a grant letter because we think that the design to handle that will be considerably more. So, we're working to try to get a design that we think is the right design to handle all the stuff there. We are also going to have to work to find funding for that. Yes, the developers are going to put in, but guys, it it what needs to happen there to really address the traffic is a major road project. So good.

Again, I had hoped and we I would had hoped when this came through we would be able to put a design in from you saying we're going to use this funding towards this design. We don't have that yet. We are getting there. I just didn't have it for tonight. It's just something I had communicated that we would but you wanted to go ahead and bring it through. So it is end of the year. We have an exhibit this morning. We can't we can't wait indefinitely. And that's their and that was their choice is that they waited three years. I mean they waited three years.

Our intent is that we will have a design to show you guys that we will and we will have to find the funding for that letter designed. But what they haven't put in front of you is yes. They have been back and forth with our team trying to get a dollar amount. That's what's important. And this is the dollar amount that we've agreed to. Can I can I try to help a little bit here?

Two things. one, this is the design that was approved by you subject to a cost share. That that was the only contingency and we made the mistake at that time of not deciding what the cost share was going to be. So now three years later, here we are. Uh if as Miss Hook suggests, the hospital folks look at our design and say, "Great, we'll live with that. Fine, build it. That's what the money's for. Build it." Uh, as far as being concerned about whether you're going to issue certificates of occupancy without there being a functioning intersection, there's language in here that says if you guys are behind or maybe the hospital is coming and you know what that's going to be, but you can't do it yet, that you could put in a temporary traffic light at that east central and intersection with the new road that comes on on the north side. And in paragraph six, it concludes with saying the city shall as necess shall important word in my business as necessary perform such improvements as may be required within the scope of the fee and loo. So that's the components of the fee and loo that the $3 million represents to asssure that the 2606 development is functional and ready for final inspection according to the phasing schedule of 2606 as may be approved by the planning commission. So, it's got to match up with what the planning commission has and it'll be in on a schedule that the planning commission has adopted and approved as part of the large scale for the phasing of this project. I don't know why you'd want to tie your hands your own hands any more than that, but that's up to y'all.

Is is this $3 million this is on top of constructing the new road? Is that that's the road not a part of that? There's a new road and the 3 million for the

Yeah, the new road that runs up the east side of the property that's shown here in pink is entirely my client's cost and will be paid for by my client. Totally independent and separate apart from this uh this fee and loo the fee and loo deals with things out here stuff that's going to be impacted by whatever happens out here where the hospital is. Whatever it is inside the parcels, it is the developer's responsibility. The outside for traffic, it is it is also some of their responsibility. That's why they are paying us $3 million to for us to assume the responsibility to do the best uh project whenever the information is available and we have the best plan that we can that we can develop on that particular situation.

What we asked them and I heard that say one I'm sorry

this is not on you because again it's a city problem at fifth street when they were not able to get that property at fifth street they could not line it up. So, what is the city's solution for that traffic jam? We'll put a sign there that says do not turn left between the hours of that is how that traffic jam got you. That's how it resolved and that is not a resolvement and that is where I what keeps me up at night because again it's the city not on you but that was not a good way to resolve that. But so how do I know we're going to resolve this one any better because there's no enforcement on I understand

and that's the other end of our neighborhood that we can't get out. So now we have two places that are probably going to have signs. Do not black. At least we can use the funds to put a temporary solution up until the larger. But will we? Because well, we better and we need to we need to be obligated ourselves that at that time that's what keeps me if that road's not we're going to take $3 million. We're going to set it aside and we're going to hold it for this project. I would hope this is set aside intentional funds and if we have to put a temporary light up because we still don't have the larger plan in place or funds available then we're going to put that up that says that in that agreement.

I ideally we should not have had them do the altered without understanding the costure on the front end and also the city is required in that you're paying for a portion a portion of it. There are few pieces of property the city would have to acquire for the roundabout at the top and that is what has given me anxiety with this to be honest with you because you're if we were to do that you are committing us to go try to get that purchase that land from those land owners with no understanding of exactly what that cost is. I have I've struggled with this. I think you guys have done things and get things but when but this this we're at we're where we're at with this project. Um in the future I would highly suggest we do not come up with a design that we want a cost share without understanding the cost share on the front end and what the responsibilities of the city would be in that cost share and do not get us into situations where we have to purchase property that we don't know what that's going to cost because Holly is right on that other side they couldn't get the pro you know

they fix there was not great so I understand where she's coming from. What I would tell you is the city is committed to getting the right traffic me mechanism in there. We will have to work to find the funding and get the right design. We think we are pretty close to that. Again, I was hoping that we could have brought the solution in conjunction with this, but it didn't happen. But so, you all need to make a decision tonight on this. I just wanted you to hear from us where we're at and where we think we're going with this this project. I just can't put that in front of you tonight.

It's important to understand that I just want to understand some store back here. We ask them to come to the table for discussions. We met with them last time. We didn't have a cost share put together. Our engineers have put a cost share together. Our both cooperative efforts have put a developers agreement together to execute. So this isn't anything that that we weren't prepared to move. We gave it to them. This is your development. Okay, we agree on these terms. So, I don't understand why we're backpedaling on the terms of the agreement since everybody has waited and it seems like that the parties came together and they've planned has approved it. They've come in good faith with an agreement we gave them. then I suggest we run a some type of separate ordinance or resolution that commits the city council to do something before the traffic gets worse. I don't think it's on the developer. I think this is a very generous offer by the developer and I don't think we should have approved it not knowing what we didn't know. That's on us. I'm just asking for something that commits the city council to act within a certain amount of time without giving a specific date. make it a little more tangible because this

so let me ask you we've done is still loosely worded in ways that will I'm just yeah I'm trying to clarify but it didn't say when we have done be in lie of agreements for as long as I've been here 24 years I don't remember we ever have committed ourselves to how we had we just have to take care of it but there have been so many developments that have come into this city and the traffic is still not solved. If we just waited till the traffic was solved for everyone, we'd never develop anything. We need to do something. But I believe the language is is saying that if it's not there's a time frame in here and if the master design and the funds hasn't been arrived at, we have to do a temporary solution.

We'll figure it out. And I I I now for a little history here that maybe will help a little bit. If you remember, were all of you here three years ago? I think you were. Yeah. Yeah. 3 plus your code requires my client to put in a traffic light at that location at that north intersection. That's it.

And that's where we went to planning commission with city originally. We went back to planning commission a couple times. I think it maybe was staff that asked us to come back with the alternative of having the roundabouts that you see here. And we came to you with the traffic light and you all said, "No, no, no. We want the We want the roundabouts and we understand it's going to be a cost share. Okay, that's where we left it. But we came to you with the traffic lights. Years passed. We learned about the hospital project and we learned that nobody knows what this stuff's going to look like. We didn't want anybody to waste money. So, we came back to you to allow to let us go back to the traffic light plan and y'all rejected that. So, we're back here at at the at the roundabout, which is fine. we're going to do what you want to do and we're going to give you $3 million to help pay for it. So, that's that's where we are. And I want again, Miss Acri, setting a specific timeline is not practical because it has to match the construction schedule of my client. My client wants it

finished waiting for an occupancy. Well, but you know what? If the city doesn't do what it's supposed to do under this agreement, they're going to have a problem with my client. problem with the client anyway get bogged down in interpreting the contract. Courts could take we need to we'll keep our word and that's what this council always stands on is we keep our word. If we say we're taking this money for an intersection to repair it, we're going to do that because if nobody at this table will break their word. Though I assume we can all count on our word being met and if we can't get the rideway secured in time for the roundabout, we'll have to put up a stoplight and we can see a contract. We have the funds to do that. If if y'all don't have any other questions of me, I'll sit down. Okay. We have two other signed up to speak.

Clara Duncan. Hello, my name is Laura Duncan and um I'm I sent a letter to y'all earlier today in opposition to this just like y'all have been talking about about the traffic issues and as someone that frequents those streets every day um it is difficult sometimes to navigate around and I worry about having three 10-story buildings and all those occupants in there getting around. Um it kind of goes in tie with what you guys had earlier. I'm very thankful that we had those emergency responders in the the that were doing the celebration this week. Um cuz I put myself into what I was uh personally in on July uh January 11th of this year. I had to call 911 for my son. And if it was during a time of day when this traffic is like we talk about, I would have lost my son. He had to go to the emergency room as quick as possible. Actually had to get lifellighted to the Children's in Little Rock. If it was during rush hour, first responders would not have made it to my house in time and not gotten my son to the hospital so he could get lifellighted. He would be dead. We really need to put people, our citizens in perspective when we're talking about these traffic. It's not just I'm going to be late to my kids game. This is life or death. So please, please make sure that we're putting the money in the right spot. We're getting the traffic flow where it needs to go so we can get people there. Because if we're going to have a giant job site there, we could have workers that are in life-threatening situations and we can't get our first responders there and then people to the hospital in time. Even if we're having a hospital that's getting ready to get built down the street, but we don't know what's going on. So,

please, please, for the your loved ones, your neighbors, we really need to get this traffic situation under check. Miss Hook mentioned Fifth Street. There are times when we have to make a left there. It's the only way I can go out onto Moberly. And I use the little cutthrough that y'all designated through the Walmart parking lot. Well, sometimes that data center Walmart parking lot cut through is blocked because we're going through private property to make that left turn. Sometimes when it's crucial, I've got to go that way. I'm in an emergency. I'm on my way somewhere like a hospital and now my my route is blocked. I have to figure out how to turn around. So, just we've really got to address the traffic in this situation. I know we're the cart's behind the horse or however that goes, but please, please, please for our loved ones. We got to solve this traffic problem. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Carar, for that respect. Good question. We have a lot of stop lightss that we've taken down. Couldn't we put a temporary up ahead of time and so we get people adjusted to stopping at the new intersection or the old intersection until we're able to do that? We could probably put up a temporary one fairly reasonable and go ahead and get a light up. That would create some assurances that we're going to

but I know transportation needs to look at all that. If we're going to put a light there, a roundabout there eventually, why don't we go ahead and help traffic during construction and everything else and get something there using the funds that's going to be done at large scale precon before they even start construction. We'll have that three and a half $3 million. Why don't we put something up temporarily and help everybody? Now, it'll be using some of the funds for that, but can it be that close to Central and Moverly? That's what we don't have. That's the Well, they're going to put a new They're going to based on the same idea, Bill. We could do it. We could figure something out either further along in construction or something. Get a get a temporary setup. Solve my objection with the contract.

No, that's not their respons. They have a developers agreement we're approving tonight. But this is something we could talk about in my opinion and come up with a a temporary solution because it's it's been a bad intersection since well before I've met a lot of people. I couldn't turn off of Battlefield years ago. You're playing Frogger for those that have own Frogger every time you try to turn left. So, it's been that way a very, very long time. And so, I understand their concern. Um, but we have an exhibit I think will help tremendously. Uh, and we have the money. So, I think we can come up with solutions and we have time to do that because it's going to take them a year before they even come to precon. Is that about right? here to come up with a temporary idea.

We have other if you'll state your name and your address and keep your comments to three minutes or under. We appreciate it. Got a timer going.

I asked for one here, but we've yet to get one. Leon Fletcher 8 Jordan Lane. Bear with me because I'm going to go completely off road from what I had written here after tonight's discussion, but I am just going because this may be my last hurrah. I have never seen a time in this city when we've ever put a sevenstory building next to a residential neighborhood and we're fixing to put four of them in one and that just irritates the crap out of me because I live there. But uh I I had questions about the traffic and the money. I had a lot of questions about the money because you guys got to understand a lot of the people reading this are just common everyday folks like me trying to make a living and it really is difficult to understand a lot of this. So, I'm going to read you what I wrote. And maybe I understand a little bit of this better now, but this is for maybe somebody else that doesn't there in the letter from the planning commission to the city council. This is something that was in there, and I'm going to read it exactly as it's written. The agreement explicitly allows the city to retain and allocate funds even if original proposed improvements are not constructed. To the everyday person, that sounds like if we decide not to do this, you've got this money. do whatever you want to do with it. If you see something better fit across town, do it. That's how we read it. That's how we interpret it. And listen, just hear me out on this. Don't throw me out. To a lot of people reading that and seeing this $3 million fund, this money given that could very easily be misinterpreted as a $3 million pride bribe to get votes to get this thing passed. It's just how e I know. I'm just saying how people can misunderstand it because they don't understand how it's written. So, I don't know. And when we start talking about it, when you guys started talking before we ever addressed it, all I kept hearing about was look at all this money we're going to get. Look at all this money we're going to get. That doesn't help the people out there that's worried that nobody's looking after them. The people that live in the neighborhood, the people that's got to drive up and down that street every day.

We're doing the same thing we've done for years in this town. How many people can we get them here? Here here. How fast can we get them here? And then we have a knee-jerk reaction because we realize we don't have the way to get people in and out of these neighborhoods now. We don't have a people to get everybody. When I talked to the plan commission about the new home office, they told me there's going to be so many exits coming out there. There'll never be a backlog. Look where we're at. And this is our concern when we pass this. Everybody's got a plan. We don't know what we're doing, but we got a plan. We're going to end up with the same thing. Everything's backlogged because we didn't think ahead to to to fix the problem before it ever started. That's all. Thanks. Just um I understand frustrations. Um, many of us and the mayor and staff has has been working diligently to try to put funds to our problems. Bond funds have been in place since 2020 to fix it. Hasn't been fixed. I get the concern. So, I would say that a lot of this lies on us. We have it. And when I when I talk about additional funds, I'm talking about if if our reasoning and shortfall has been that we don't have enough money, this helps us get there to fix the sol to have a solution. And so I hope that this moves us in a way that we've all wanted to to fix this drainage to fix because that was one of the first concerns before this project even came up was drainage. Well, and just to clarif like we're trying to get the right design for what's you don't want us to go build the original bond design because it's not going to we'll get it built and it won't it won't address your issue and that

that's the challenge is just the timelines are not lining and again I I hope that I could put in front of you something you could see in a design tonight and I don't have that be able to do it. I am hopeful we will have that I think we're on instructor to get it pretty relatively quickly from here. I just don't have it for you tonight. So I I understand that's why I was dreading tonight because I didn't have that put in front of y'all. But um this this is in front of them. I do understand from the developer too that their timelines. Um, and we also we have a p we have created a pathway forward on water and sewer. So that's probably I don't know but maybe another reason why it's coming through is until just a few months ago we didn't really have a great pathway forward there either. So you had the road argument but also the water argument that we had we did have solved that and so they the development fee they do have a pathway forward there. So I understand why this is night as well. I

and I agree that it's very this verbiage is very difficult to understand and I myself called our legal team to get some further explanations on it and we I feel like Mr. Watkins has laid out pretty clearly all of the places that protects you guys that states what we have to do. And so because of that, I feel confident that we have a plan in place and that we're not we aren't we aren't being shortsighted actually because we aren't committing ourselves to something when we know that there's something else coming and that we can make we can actually have a cohesive project. But I think we are thinking long term in that and so I have confidence that this agreement is sufficient

and I certainly will hope that you'll hold us accountable if we don't keep our word that we've made here tonight because I certainly will that this will be addressed and so uh if there's if unless anybody has any other discussion I'd like to make a motion that it's approved. I I I do think we have to approve this, but I really I am familiar with the legal language that's in there, and I do think that there are some concerns. But if I can get a commitment from this body that we will do something temporary as soon as possible, that creates assurances for the public that we're going to fix this. Well, can we make a commitment that we have streets look at it and we I mean we can

I think that's what we need to do anyway. The last time they looked at something we got a sign that said do not block exit. No, what I don't want What do we get at Fifth Street? But that's that's another which is the other way we get out of our neighborhood. No, I'm not trying. What I'm the development what I'm saying is that I agree that because this is a long project

and are we going to wait uh I mean we if we have funds available I don't want to also spend money and then throw it away either. There's a temporary solution to hang a wire from pole to pole and put a light up. It doesn't have to be everything it can it's done all the time in a temporary light solution to help things out. Uh, I would I would think it's a good idea. We have a year before they even start. They'll give us the money when they do the precon, but they got to finish everything else, architecturals, engineering for, you know, with all these changes. So, we have a year to think about this and get this back on our plate and then we have three years to plan it. So, let's make sure that we don't forget this. And we we keep it as a review item every couple quarters and we can see how we're going. We can bring it up in finance. We can bring it up in other committees just so this stays on the top of the subject matter. Just just, hey, can you get an update?

Well, we've got we could commit to some type of temporary solution that won't cost a huge amount. Let's see what streets comes up to do that. they can come up with but give them time to come up with that answer. So we've got plenty of time before they even move forward on a precon. Um so we've got a 10 to 10 months to a year before that even happens to start construction. But Bill, I I mean my skepticism comes from things like we committed several years ago to start working on connecting sidewalks from the schools out and then we have $600,000 left over that we didn't spend. Things happen. Oh, I get it. You're preaching to the fire there. I get it.

We are going to do something about this. Um, where's Tyler? Um, could you clarify me? Do we have dedicated rightaway for the original bond project through? Do we have everything we need for that original? Oh, we did those appraisals a long time. Dan would probably be the best one to answer that, but I know he has an exhibit of all of the existing rights of way and all the right of ways currently under negotiation right now.

About five years ago, we accepted a bid to do all the rightway negotiations and get the ride ofways. That was over about four or five years ago when we because I was surprised how high the appraisal cost was to get all those rideaways. But then I learned what they had to go through to get it all. It was longer than before I even heard about this project. But we finalize the rideway anything as this project comes through. Yes. All necessary rideway for the Bentonville bond project and any future traffic improvements including whether it's the two roundabouts or whatever the final uh proposed solution is. It would dedicate be required to dedicate adequate ride of way. Thank you.

I second Bill's motion to vote on this item. in a second. Any other discussion?

Did you read it? Let's just read it again. Just to be safe. I'm pretty sure I did, but I want new bit or planning item number 16, a resolution approving a development agreement for the central and battlefield project and for other purposes. Move. Second. Bart. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. No. Yes. Yes.

Discussion. Item number 17 is an ordinance adopting the Bentonville Community Code. Planning item number 17, an ordinance adopting the Bentonville Community Code pursuant to Arkansas Code annotated section 14-56-301 and further purposes. So move second. We have some comments on the line. I went to Oh, I don't have anybody signed up, but if now is the time for discussion. So, I was going to say we got a lot of emails like here in the ninth inning about that central east central.

Um, it's like they thought they were getting suburban neighborhood. Is Tyler here? Oh, there you are. Sorry, I was looking back because you were on the back girl. Um, have you seen the emails? I have. They literally came in like Yep. late. But they thought they were getting suburban neighborhood and now they can get threetory office buildings right behind that Stonebridge neighborhood.

That property is currently zoned RORO. So the property in question is currently zoned RORO and would allow for threetory office buildings today. What we did back in back last year when we adopted the future land use map, the land use category for that tract and for that entire vicinity currently shows as suburban neighborhood. So when we're adopting the zoning map itself, we had to do a as close as we could to a 1:1 translation. And the closest translation from RORO was T4.2 as we're adopting these new zoning districts. So this property we did a direct translation from RORO or proposing a direct translation from RORO to T4.2 just like what we've done on all the other RORO zone properties in the city. Now, if someone wanted to come and reszone to like a T5.1, which is more of the scale of what was being proposed previously on that piece of property through a PRD, well, they wouldn't be able to do that because the future land use map for that piece of property is suburban neighborhood.

So, what what would be are there anything that would be allowed in a T2 T2.4? Is that right? 4.2. Sorry. T4.2 do that would not currently be allowed in the RORO.

So, and that's I said as close as I could to a onetoone translation. So, the uh 4.2 allows for a little bit more commercial activity um than the RORO does. The height is comparable, but it's I I think the height in T4.2 is a little bit taller. But then the next district down T4.1 doesn't allow for commercial uses at all. So like we're stuck in this weird in between. Correct. Based on the transition would have to transition from the transition. So the 4.2 would possibly allow like some services some

correct good services. That's the hope. It does allow for it does allow for um some different forms of residential typologies. RO allows for single family, two family, and then condominium development where RO or excuse me, T4.2. It's up until uh 12 dwellings per building is the most you can do. The T point the.1 would not allow for more services. It would really just be residential. Residential or office, not office and for not office. That's the quandry. Okay. I just have a question. The RORO allows for office

resial office clarification on the transition. Yes. Is that relative to every zone that you can depending on their height allocation there still has to be the transition if it's next to Yeah. So yeah. So that's the table there in zone transitions in article five. It says if you have this zoning district next to this zoning district, here's what that transition looks like. We're not going to have any situation around the city where you're going to have a high-rise right next to a single family neighborhood without some type of transition. Yes.

Unless the unless the adjacent single family is already zoned like for that higher use. So, I'm thinking some of your properties downtown that, you know, I've heard, oh my gosh, there's they built this big building next to me and then you explain to people, well, wait a minute, your property is already zoned for the same thing, but they're choosing to develop it at a smaller scale. I parcel that we were talking earlier about uh Central and Battlefield has a sevenstory building right next to Battlefield, very close to Central and it is across from Park.

Yep. And but the which is only one floor uh residential R1 but the distinction on that and this is to uh address some concerns that I see in the audience. It is uh the the difference with that is that the building is going to be uh quite a distance from residents and that is what it is in the code that says for so many feet you can go so so feet higher and higher. That's why it is it is it is within the limits of the specifications that allow this building because there is a street in between which is I don't know 100 ft of perhaps 150 ft if you consider all the way to the to the building. So it is not going to be exactly right next to each other. It is going to be a separation of perhaps 150 ft or so. And that's one of the concessions the developer made because remember initially they had it designed differently and the planning commission in this body decided no that's not going to work in staff and they that was long time ago.

Am I correct to on the seven story on that seventh story that kicks in all the fire. Yeah. Once you get above 75 ft in height class by doing that one more story they may I don't know it was also a PUD planned unit development which isn't in this code but does that matter with what the mayor's talking about with the fire safety because I heard like between floor six and seven is when all the cost because they're responsible

so there is a few and there are a few very specific height thresholds where additional cost kicks in. One is at 30 feet because that's when you're required to do aerial access. So the street or you have to do the 26 foot wide fire access lanes so that they can service the building and that there's room for the outriggers on the truck. The other big one is at 75 ft because that's the delineation between midrise and high-rise standards. So that's why sixth and seventh floor I need floors. Okay, that tends so it

depends on what the height typically. So typically a sixstory building like a very common typology across the country is called five over one which it's you know it's a single story of commercial five stories of residential above and it they do that so it kicks in right below that 75 ft. Um but we do have some buildings in town that went above that and are built to the high-rise standard. Bitville Plaza would be one example and the Ledger is built to high-rise standards as well. So, did they have to put in the extra for the fire safety? Correct. Okay.

Yeah, they'll have to put it in no matter what. It's code. Yeah, it's still I mean they obviously they can still look into their backyards and see all things. I mean, I it's just really awkward to me to see all these big high-rise. You act like that's a lot, but it's really not ft. Yes, I understand that. But what I'm saying is that it is according to the code. Oh, no. I'm not doubting that. Yeah,

it may be so close. Some neighbors will think that hey it is right next to me but actually it is at a distance that matches the the standard regulations that were built long long ago not not for this particular purpose any other discussion. Yeah. So I I mean it does seem like this match this it's just hard like I just I want to be really careful with our R1 suburban areas that we are letting we promised them that we would but it does seem like since that was previously zoned we can't down change the zoning

it was say there was actually an email about that where they did check with legal I mean I hate that this came in like at 217 today because um but they did check with legal and we did that was not necessarily true that they could actually sue us if we zoned it down. Well, it's not I would defer to our legal counsel. It's from Heidi Stewart. If you look,

we did one down zone on one street and I hope to God we never did it again because it it it it took somebody based on our our plan and our proposal what somebody could do. they bought property based on that and then we told them they couldn't do it anymore. We are open for a lawsuit whether somebody it's not whether we will or whether they can, it's will they. So, you know, but as far as the land use goes, are we are we saying we don't want to adopt the land use because of this zoning? What I would tell you is we were very this is a stone right

on the R1 and we were very intentional trying to create those transition zones to try to address and I don't I honestly don't know any better way we could do it and we worked really hard to try to put this and kind of we created our own code say

honestly to be able to try to we heard those things account for it in in the code. So, I hear you. I just don't I don't think there's anything else we can do other than what we've done to really address that and then yes, not get into situations where you're uh down down zoning. I would tell you to one thing that helped me was to look at areas where transition zones are. And for me, when I saw it visually, it made a lot of sense. It felt right. It felt that felt right from a planning standpoint when I saw it in other communities. So, that's what I did. So, I don't know if that helps y'all or not, but I I do know we've been very intentional. You know, there is there we've talked about there's been a big push to get rid of R1 zoning. We did not do that. Some other communities have done that. We were very intentional and we were also very intentional with our transition zones to try to account for that, but still allow people to build So I I you know we were

in in this particular uh parcel that has been uh has the concern that were that came to us uh repeatedly over the last uh year and two. uh the the concern about having that parcel R0 as today as it is today and uh moving it down to R1 or something similar certainly opens the door for the owner to complain with the judge and come against us because it is it is a situation that is already there. Wouldn't you?

Yeah, absolutely. It it is perfectly per valid. Today I had a conversation in this afternoon with one of the owners in that area and uh we discussed the situation even though their lawyer uh advised them that they will not have much of a a leg to stand on. Uh it is it is without being a lawyer and them not being a lawyer. It is the understanding that if they are going to be have a cut in their potential profit for this particular parcel, they are going to complain. They are not going to be happy. They'll be complaining about it because they already have the right to do R and they cannot be downgraded to to R1. They they can be upgraded to uh T42 or whatever it is, but not to R1. Are we talking about adopting the plan or or we're trying not to adopt the plan based on a parcel? Are we discussing a zoning issue with the parcel or are we talking about the land use plan?

The zoning code. The zoning code. Community code. I I if we've drilled it down to something that was an RORO to begin with and and we're Is there a motion second on the table? Okay. I I did you did just say there is somebody online. I don't have them signed in. I think they only got on the Zoom. They didn't actually get that one. Okay. So, let somebody in. Okay. So, at this time, we'll recognize the person online they want to speak. You'll give us your name and address and keep your comments to three minutes or we appreciate it. Okay. Can you hear me? Okay.

Excellent. I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Sorry, I'm out of town otherwise I'd be there in person. I appreciate you taking the time to look at the parcel on on Central Avenue and um and I'm glad that you saw uh the communication from me and others from today about about that. Uh there's many many people that are concerned about that especially because it seemed like last year um after much uh discussion it was agreed upon by the uh planning committee and the city council to to make all three of those parcels there um suburban residential and and now and now they're saying that one of those parcels is is going to be um and I don't know the exact T4.2 and and so I'm confused why it was what's the point of having the plan um when it's not going to be followed through and and that's my concern and uh I know there's there's lots that you have to deal with um but but we are still concerned about what potentially could be built there and uh don't feel that it's it's the it's fair and so I appreciate you listening and and um I just want to echo that that that if it's a legal concern we we we've talked with with our attorney and and there doesn't appear to be a a concern that there isn't much that that they can stand on in regards to bringing forth a case and and there's more than than than money at hand here. There there's the concerns of many many residents, hundreds of residents in the area. So, thank you for your time. That is all. Um I think one of the concerns that I heard in that particular situation is is something that uh we are experiencing in many places in town which is traffic. It is absolutely terrible to to travel on those avenues.

I was coming from uh college place into Woods Creek and then trying to cross 72 at 5:00 p.m. It is practically impossible only when somebody stopped and because there was no traffic coming from P reach then I was able to cross the street. Other than that I'll have stayed there until 7 p.m. or whatever the time it is because it is practically impossible. The traffic as it is today is terrible. equally bad as it is on 14th Street and 8th Street and many other streets that we have on 72 East or out in our trying to get in and work in the morning to go.

I think those are that's why when that's why we have to be very intentional with our roads and what we're doing and when we make commitments to making things better, we have to be serious about it. I I and I think that anything that were to come in on that would those considerations would we would be considering again right based on that build it today right they can be yeah yeah so are we saying that they've already zoned this and then we're going to say but you can't do what it's already zoned for when this plan passes

okay yeah no I'm I'm not saying that it it is already our own so we cannot go down to R1 we have to go to R2, R three, R4, whatever. We we cannot go down. We have to go either at the same level or up otherwise the owner of the property will be affected. Now the the that's not right either.

The main difficulty on this particular situation and it is right across from the main entrance to Kensington. It it is it is impossible to to maneuver at a certain times of the day and that is not a situation that happens only there. It is we mentioned uh battlefield and central and many other places. It is the the situation is very difficult even though it is only a few hour at a few times a day early morning noon and the a at a certain time in the afternoon it is very difficult for our citizens to travel in the city by car. Well, that is

I concur. Especially on on 102, which I still call it, and on 12, I can see all the way back to the plateau of center, bumper to bumper, moving at one mile an hour, the tens of thousands of people coming into town every day from both east and west, 8th Street,

8th Street. I mean, so it it is Would I rather be there than adding to the traffic coming into town? Yes. Now this lead us to another conversation that we are not going to have today but it is the the aspect of public transportation. It is what we have today is uh beginning to scratch the surface because the miles and miles of cars that we see on the road are not going to become less over time. They are actually leaning to become more of a problem. Oh, Tyler. Oh, if it if if someone did try to build on that commercial, the threetory, would that go to large scale or would that actually come to us?

Uh, that would go to large scale. So, it would go to planning commission. So, we would never say it. Well, you would see any kind of subdivision plat, but the development plans themselves would not be required to go to city council. No, because it already had it already has its zoning. Correct. Just like it has now. Correct. the AR app currently the AR wouldn't come they were to do a development.

We're also hearing apparently there's one attorney their attorney has said that we can't be sued for downgrading and then we're hearing we can be sued. So we got two attorneys saying two different things which adds to the confusion of clarity because if we could downzone why wouldn't we? Oh we haven't. But if we pass this, we definitely can't. It's not right about that. Yeah, we haven't done that to anyone else in my opinion. I don't think if we want to have a legal discussion whether we should suit or not. I don't know if we need to have that. Do we have a motion? Yes. Yes.

Motion and second on the uh ordinance adopting the Bentonville Community Code. There is one. I I just have one more question. So, and I Shelley and I have had this discussion. I feel like we got to start somewhere and then do um addendums maybe if we need to because it's a lot. Like this is out of my pay grade as far as maybe one day as far as memorizing all this and knowing this. I'll be the first to I it's it's a lot and I'm not clearly understanding every single aspect of it. But I agree with what Shel and I we've got to start somewhere. But what does that look like if we do need to make an addendum? What just what would that look like? Yeah.

To me,

so we meet internally monthly at what we call code review committee. And what we can do, we can keep this as a standing item as we continue to work through it because as you mentioned, like we know we have to get started with this to know what's working, what's not working, what's working really well, what's not working very well at all. Um, we actually had on Friday what we called code school at our developers forum which actually that that as well was a good opportunity to educate our development community on hey here's what the new code says got some good feedback already on like hey have you thought about x y or z. I think there's a lot of opportunity to well one that event filled up registration. We open registration Friday. It was closed by Monday. Um so we always do that session in spring and fall but we're going to offer a summer session as well for that. Uh we're going to host some internal code training for our uh both you know our development review team but also the development review team and other departments too. And we can certainly open that up and make that a topic of conversation with you guys with planning commission and be very transparent about like what we're hearing and the changes as we're bringing them through because any of those are going to have to go to both planning commission and ultimately you guys for adoption at city council. That's super helpful because every time I dig into this and I've spent way too much time on both of these topics tonight that

but every time I do I I come up with some questions and more whatif scenarios and so I thank you for that explanation on the um making amendments because that does I because I want to start somewhere like I don't want to keep I I can't like my mental capacity is spent on and and there's so there it well we're going to find I need a degree in it

and I found you know when when we opened up registration for the forum or for code school one of the questions we asked was like what was your what's your most burning question about the upcoming code which got all that feedback which then allowed myself and our team to go back and really tailor that curriculum to answer the questions that the attendees had and we can continue to do that and iterate upon that

for me Being technical, I'm looking at setbacks. I'm looking at lots. I'm looking at the technical aspect on how it affects subdivisions that I was able to do or can I still do it or what it will affect. So, there's going to be things as people try to use this that's going to come up and there's going to be suggestions to be made. I've decided to put them in a format of amendments that here if here's my thought process. Here's what I would change and why I would change it. And I gave that to him to look at future revisions. and I'll if I find something I'll have them review with a full set of codes with backup information and so I'm providing that to them so we can they can discuss it amongst the code review look at it and see if if I can be part of a a better solution to it. Um and that's how I've chosen to do it is provide them that outline of a document that uh they can review on their own and implement over time. As we find more things, we're going to find more things. But like everybody said here, this is the starting point. And so I commend them from getting here. Uh, frankly, I could probably ask questions for till the cows come home, but I don't want to. So, I'll do it the way I did it today. I'll provide suggestions and go from there.

We have a motion in second. Yes. Do sit down. Roll call, please. Cartner. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Hot bangs. Item 18 is a ordinance adopting the Bentonville zoning map. So moved. Planning item number 18, an ordinance adopting the Bentonville zoning map pursuant to Arkansas Code annotated section 14-56-301 and for other purposes. So move. Second. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Sorry. I'm sorry. Are you boycotting me? Yes. Burkhart. Yes. Sorry. Item number 19 is an ordinance adopting a downtown neighborhood overlay district map. Planning item number 19, an ordinance adopting the downtown neighborhood overlay district map and regulations pursuant to Arkansas code annotated section 14-56-301 and for other purposes. Second a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Sanchez, yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Bart, yes. Hook, yes.

I just want to say something about the overlay. I really appreciate the work you did on that, Tyler. And I think that this was the next best thing we could do to a historic district and the first step in trying to preserve some of our historic culture. So, I'm really proud of this council of doing this. Item number 20 is the ordinance adopting the downtown center overlay district. Planning item number 20, an ordinance adopting the downtown center overlay district map and regulations pursuant to Arkansas code annotated section 14-56-301 and further purposes. So, move second. Motion and a second. Any other discussion? Roll call, please. Patterson. Yes. Bacon, yes. Yes. Sitter,

yes. Birkhart, yes. Hook, yes. Yes. Passes unanimously. Um, that concludes our voting agenda. So, if I can get a motion to adjourn from second motion and a second. All in favor? I will go to

uh we didn't have anybody signed on. They're all agenda items, so we don't have any public comments. not on non-aggenda items. Um we'll go to committee review, but I do have um uh I'm going to pass this around if you will indicate to us if you do want your the city number that you were given with the phones that the city purchased for you. If you want that listed online, please mark yes or no on here for us and we will put that phone number up there. We took the originally you had your own cell phone numbers up there and we have taken those down, but we will put the city number back up if you tell us to do that. Also, currently your addresses are up there. I think they were up there to show what word you're in. If you want to take that down, you can let us know.

We just put the word representing up there and not our address. What word? Yeah, I think it says w, but I think it does also say your address. Airbnb. I kind of like could say the ward and take the address off if that's would be my preferred. Yeah. So, everybody would like us to take their address off. Sure. Nobody comes to see me. Y'all want your address off if they do like kind of lift not there for good reason.

Dogs come up. the dogs from the park and it's like do uh committee reviews and stuff nothing to the glare nothing to the glare are you sure don't fruit I'm so glad the grand just Aubrey anything sorry I'm really focused on the form um I do not have anything I have to declare I can operate my iPad Yeah. Okay. I have nothing. I have nothing. Wow. Nothing. Nothing. Okay. So, I do. That's okay. We want to hear it. You worked on Saturday with her.

Yeah. Holly's the only one doing any work apparently. So,

it in the tree and landscape tree giveaway. We gave over 500 trees away. the crowd was there way before we were. So, it's popular. Um people um are still coming. We do it twice a year. And um Shellyley, kudos to her, who just I guess apparently left. Um she is now back in charge of us because um Taylor has left. And so Shelley was there and coming back to it after a few years. Um it went well. So, um, kudos to that and also to Bailey for organizing the clean the streets, which, um, was a good way to, it was called Celebrate America. So, I think it was across America this time where everybody was cleaning their streets in their community on Saturday. So, two great things coming out of our planning department. So, kudos to them. And

kudos to the setup for tree and landscape. The traffic setup by far. I think that's the best that hasn't gotten out into major traffic and back things up. So I think that is your that's a good gang. They brought him municipal complex. They brought him up through and on the back end and took him out the back of the complex and I thought it didn't get backed up any of the stuff on Walton or anything and we were done by 10:00 which is record time. Um, actually we were probably done closer to 9:30. Um, because people came and went. It's It was almost like Chick-fil-A. We had it down to a delivery. Okay. So, I have

This is just You guys can give me your comment. We have been asked to do a proclamation as a just served city. Um, y'all are Sorry, what is that? Just served city. It's a volunteer thing, right? It's a volunteer. Yeah. So I have that information. If you want to give me any feedback on that, you can. Um the high school, right? There's asking if we wanted they have asked us to adjust or recommend the high school the high schools have.

Um if you all want to give me any feedback on that, but if um you can let me know. Also when you designated what do you mean to just recognize get a certificate? Yeah, I think yeah that's just to do a a proclamation or if we just do it I think but um we can do it I don't know we can decide how we want to do that but basically recognized as a just served city so y'all can look up the organization and I'm going to leave it at that and then y'all can give me feedback on that. Um you sent us an email subject. No, I have not sent it asking you if you write it down on your notebook. Um,

you know, like the only other thing I could like you got recognized as a pet to the USA before because of this is this is an organization wanting to recognize this as and it has to do with volunteerism and and being recognized. So y'all can look at it's that connects you with volunteer opportunities. So like you can No, not pets. Has nothing to do with pets. And then also the registration for municipal league is open.

Um you did miss the early bird reg registration but it is open. But the m conference is June 17th through 19th. So y'all have to do you do have to do your own registration everything and then let us know. Was it fish best? Okay. We just All right. Quick question. Yes, sir. Are we using our new email addresses? You should be because mine's not working. Did you ever figure that out? Is not working.

The should I had some issues? Yeah, everything forged. It fell. ar.gov. It's gonna be your first name with a dot and then your last name fully spelled out at bentonville.gov. Are we those cards? So, right now ours have the old edge email and our personal phone numbers. Yeah, we can do that. I don't need I don't need I'm totally paperless. I'm electronic. and you said, "Yeah, if you feel like you need one, come

let my office know." How long will they email to the Okay. Oh, good. I fig it'll be up in the poster board and Hey, that's it. Yeah. Put it on the board. All right. Chris, how did you know about that? Someone said something about pets.