Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Let us pray. Heavenly Father, we give you thanks and we give you all the glory. Thank you for your grace, for your mercy, and just asking for your forgiveness for any one of our faults. And we just ask for your direction here tonight and wisdom on the items brought before us tonight. And just guide us and let us be thoughtful and wise for the city of Springdale. We also give you thanks. We give you thanks for just all the residents, the citizens, the employees, and leadership of this great city. And we just continue asking for wisdom and guidance on every single decision of this growing city. Again, we give you all the praise and all the glory. And we just ask you to be with us here in this place today. In Jesus Christ's name we pray. Amen.

We'll start with approval of the minutes from last month's meeting, so call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

That passes nine to zero. We'll get a few items that have, call, sorry.

Brent Couch.

Here.

Chris Hussain.

Here.

Clement Ogunyemi.

Here.

Matt Philpott.

Here.

Howard Austin.

Here.

Jennifer Keith. Here. Mark Cloud.

Here.

Ray Cordiel.

Here.

Teresa Reynolds. Here.

All right. Now we've got a few items that have been tabled this evening. The first one is RP26-06, Jacob's Crossing, Phases 2 and 3. L26-06, Miller Floor Expansion, which includes B26-56 and W26-24. Also B26-40, Victor Hugo Caldera. B26-47, M. Mile. B26-51, no. That's it. But I'll start with our items that were tabled at our last meeting. The first one up is R26-23, Jose D. and Maria D. Rodriguez for a rezone. Presented by Jesus and Ana Rodriguez. Yeah, please come down. Yes, ma'am. All good? If you'll just state your name and your address and tell us what you're here for.

Yes, sir. So my name is Anna Rodriguez. I am presenting the 488 Purtle Avenue agenda. And I'm here just to ask... If I am allowed permission to build a single family home, it would be going from single family to multi-family, just because of the space of the property. But really, it's just a small home for me and my family. Just have a larger space. That would be it.

Any comments from staff?

The rezoning request is in keeping with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is recommended for approval. To encourage the development of a variety of housing types appropriate to the size and income of all households living and working in Springdale. To allow an increase to medium or high density residential when land value prevents economic development of low density residential. Multifamily housing should be developed at a density and scale that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and available utilities in roadway capacity.

Anything from the public?

I would like to clarify it would just be a home for me and my family. It's not something that would be like condos or multifamily units or anything like that. I am a single mother, so we just require more space, and that is it. Is there anything there right now? There's a smaller single family home there.

So you're looking to keep the existing home and just add an additional one?

Yes.

Okay. Go ahead.

I was going to say that that can't necessarily be guaranteed just with a zoning change. So there are required area regulations. There are other factors to consider. So tonight the planning commissioners are just considering the request of whether that medium density zoning is appropriate there. which the staff recommendation says it is, but if your goal is just seeking to have an accessory dwelling unit behind your current single-family home, there was some new state legislation introduced last year that makes that permitted by right today. You would just have to visit the Planning and Building Department, get with us on the size of and uniqueness of it, and we can determine that. I just want to let you know that option is available without the rezoning.

Okay. Well, I've spoke to different people, the city builders and whatnot, engineers, and I was told that because of the size of the lot that I would have to request a rezoning, and that's why I started with that step.

And if you want us to proceed with the request, the commissioners were willing to vote on it tonight. But I'll say I cannot confirm that here in the moment, right, without us. And you would want to come to the planning and or building department at the city. We'll be the ones who will actually be able to confirm what you're allowed to build and how big they're. Okay, great.

Yeah, I would recommend you meet with a planning staff and see if ADU by right will work for what you're needing. And then if you need something beyond that, meet with them and they can tell you, because I think MF12 is way over zoned for what you're really wanting. So would you consider tabling this? That gives you 30 days. You can meet with them and find out what is the best path forward. And then if you still want to rezone, bring it back next month and we can listen to it then. Is that something that would work for you?

Yeah, of course. I thought I had spoke to the planning commission and it was just what I was advised to do. which is why I'm here, but if you think it's an option that is viable, then yeah, of course that would be great.

Yeah, yes, I do. I think that would be a more appropriate option, just so we can figure out what the best route for your project is.

Okay, perfect. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is R26-24, City of Springdale, Arkansas, Tyson Poultry, Inc., presented by Bates & Associates.

Eli LaSalle here from Bates & Associates representing this project, which is a request to rezone this property from I-1 to I-2. Go ahead.

Any staff comments?

The rezoning request is in keeping with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is recommended for approval. to assure the development of adequate services and utilities and take maximum advantage of railroad facilities, consolidate industrial areas near traffic arteries and collectors, rail, air facilities, and major utility trunk lines.

Any public comment? Anything from the commission?

A QUESTION ON LIKE WHAT IS ANTICIPATED IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE KEEPING BASICALLY DOING WHAT THEY HAD BEEN DOING WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNERS, WHAT IS THE NEED TO CHANGE THE ZONING AT THIS TIME?

IT WASN'T IN COMPLIANCE. IT WAS AN I-1. AN ANIMAL PROCESSING NEEDS TO BE AN I-2. SO REALLY THIS WAS JUST AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO, IT HAD BEEN CONSIDERED GRANDFATHERED IN WITH THE ZONING. SO NOW THAT TYSON IS REDEVELOPING IT, WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY AND come in to compliance in many areas. So number one was with zoning. So they'll be coming into compliance with other things as well? Yes, expected.

If there's another comment, this is a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

Passes nine to zero.

Staff will prepare an ordinance that is actually going to go to City Council next Tuesday on the 9th.

Okay, yeah, thank you. Let us know if you need anything else from us, but otherwise, we'll see you then.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next is C26-07 and B26-41, Sabor del Campo, LLC, presented by Maria Elena Ceja Centeno.

Good afternoon, my name is Mirna Ordonez and I'm the associate for Elena Cejas Centeno, the owner of Sabor del Campo LLC located in 2246 East Robinson Avenue here in Springdale. We are here to request your approval for our application of conditional use of a food truck trailer that we wanted to start at this location. At the same time, we would like you to approve our application for a couple of variances, which is the size of the truck, which goes a little bit 10% more of what is the limit here, and that you allow us to connect the electricity from the existing building to the food truck. so that we can run the operations of the food safely at that location. I'm going to be also the translator for Elena Ceja, and I would like her to address the committee at this time.

Good afternoon. I want to start this business to benefit the working people of this community.

Good afternoon. I wanted to start this business in order to benefit the working people of this community.

I wanted to offer to the people fresh food prepared with healthy and fresh ingredients and very nutritious as well.

con sabores característicos del campo mexicano, with true flavors of the Mexican country.

Además, empezar este negocio es algo personal.

Besides, starting this business is something personal to me. As a mother, I wanted to show a true example of entrepreneurship and hard work for my kids.

That's why I'm asking your support so that my vision becomes a reality.

At this point, I would like to welcome any questions that you may have.

Any staff comments?

So in reviewing this conditional use request, so we got the variance request for the size being over the max and the utility connection. But there were two other points of maintaining three parking spaces. and not blocking parking for other uses that I did have some concerns about that staff raised. And even just through aerial imagery, since I think, because right now it's home to auto sales business, right? Exactly.

Which is also the business for her family. About your concern, yes, we had a lot of cars in the past. But since two months ago, we have been reducing our inventory in order to make enough space for the food truck, the three spaces that we're going to have for the food truck, and also to have five parking spaces exclusively for the dealership.

That does address one of the concerns, and I guess for the commissioners, is that just through aerial imaging, since about 2019, since the business came into that site, that it just started encroaching to the north and getting bigger and bigger with the amount of cars parked and gravel all the way to the very northern property line. And it's a long, deep lot that is probably hard to see. But just through the images that we do, there was some concern about keeping it clear and accessible. And so one of the conditions that staff had recommended on the second page of the memo was prior to issuance of a business license to require that confirmation that it is clear and safe. And whether the commissioners want to consider that as a condition or have that be verified beforehand, I'll leave that up to you. But I wanted you to at least be aware of that. The two variances that they have, Their hours and the other elements of the site are okay. And then just to read on the record the conditions that are with the mobile vending, the use unit 44 that will be required with it. So the one staff added one is prior to issuance of a business license, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan demonstrating that the food truck operation does not reduce, obstruct, or interfere with required parking and clearly identifying the parking spaces reserved for the food truck customers. The proposed layout shall be subject to planning department approval and a site inspection shall be completed by planning staff prior to the issuance of a business license. And then from code, parking and loading areas identified may not operate between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. No obstruction of parking spaces is required for the operation of any other use on the site. Maintain on the side a minimum of three parking spaces designated for the use. If a health certificate is required, display the health certificate in a manner visible to customers. No obstruction of pedestrian or motor vehicle flow. No obstruction of traffic signals or regulatory signs. No vending upon a public way. No sound device that produces a loud or raucous noise in violation of city ordinance or violation of any other city ordinances in connection with the vending operation. Keep the vending sites clean and free of paper or refuse of any kind generated from the operation of their business. All trash and debris accumulating within 20 feet of any vending stand shall be collected and deposited into a trash container. Submission of approved gray water disposal by Springdale Water Utilities. Submission of approved grease disposal method approved by Arkansas Department of Health. And all signs must meet the requirements of a temporary sign, Chapter 98. No flashing signs or lights allowed.

Any public comment? Please come forward.

Hi, I'm Steve Lyle. I'm here on behalf of Meatanda Grocery Store, which is, if you go back to that first slide with the aerial, it's the property just to the east of the applicant's property. The applicant now has a used car business and a car repair business already on the site. Me tend to, like any other commercial property, would love to have a good commercial neighbor next door that helps everybody. This is just not a good fit. And the problem we have is that when you can tell from the outset that it's not a good fit, if it gets approved, then it becomes a real enforcement issue. It becomes, you know, all the things that have to be done, if they're not done, then that falls onto someone in the city and the neighbors to try to enforce it. But if you see here, I sent some pictures over. Most of these pictures were taken last week, the ones in your packet. So the one I'm looking at now is the front of the property. As you can see, there are cars parked on this property everywhere. There's not room on this property right now for another vehicle. They go all the way back to the property on both sides. What looks to be EMPTY GREEN SPACE IN THIS AREA, YOU PROBABLY HAVE FOUR OR FIVE CARS THAT ARE BACKED IN ONTO THE GREEN GRASS THAT ARE PARKED THERE. ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU HAVE A ROW OF CARS WHERE, LOOKING AT THIS, THIS SHOWS THAT THE CARS ARE MAYBE EVEN ON TO MITIENDA'S PROPERTY IN THIS PICTURE. THEY GO PAST THE POWER POLE. AND I'LL SAY, From the application, it looks like that's going to be reserved possibly for the vending of the food. These cars don't have tags, so I'm assuming that they're probably cars that are for sale. That means they're going to be there all the time. And on the other side of the property, you have the same thing. You can see in this picture, you can see the food truck was up and was in operation for some time apparently. But you have the same thing on this side where they show VENDOR PARKING SPACES IN THE RED, THERE ARE CARS THAT ARE PARKED THERE, SOME OF WHICH DON'T HAVE TAGS. THOSE AREN'T PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING AND GOING. THOSE ARE STATIC, EITHER CARS THAT ARE FOR SALE OR POSSIBLY CARS, THERE ARE ALSO CARS THAT ARE BEING SERVICED AT THIS SITE. AND SO WHEN YOUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT POINTED OUT THAT THERE'S SOME THINGS THEY RED FLAGGED, THAT THE PARKING IS GOING TO BE BLOCKED, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE THREE It doesn't, they're going to have three spaces for both, three extra spaces for customers coming and going. MeTienda already has some issues with customers coming and going to this side. If they don't have parking, they park in the MeTienda grocery store parking lot and they walk over. And that's, it's already existing, and so this is only something that could make that worse. You know, and then in this picture, you can see there was cooking going on in the parking lot, and pedestrians in the parking lot eating. And then, and I don't know what appears to me to be something spilled underneath what was being cooked in the parking lot. And that's important to me, Tienda. They have prepared food that they offer for sale too. And because they're a grocery store and they already have their health department certifications, they have put a lot of money into things like refrigeration and sanitation procedures and protocols. They have a restroom that's available. And we just don't want a situation where it's going to be encouraging someone to be in a situation where they're not following all those same protocols that need to be followed and are also just causing a potential problem. Your code even mentions specifically that when you have On this issue of a mobile vendor, conducting the business of the mobile vending site in such a manner as to create a public nuisance, cause a breach of the peace, constitute a danger to the public health, safety, welfare, or morals, or interfere with the rights of abutting property owners. Not at all opposed to the idea of their goals for that site, but this is just not the right place for it. It's not a good fit. It is going to cause hardship for the abutting property owners and some potential health, safety, and concerns. There's only one entrance in and out if you're going to have people that are trying to eat there on the site. Again, when you look at those pictures that I gave you, there's not room for another vehicle there right now. So we ask that you deny this. And I know sometimes the tendency is to get, you know, have the landowner say, well, no, we'll do it. But the problem is if they don't, then it becomes a very difficult enforcement issue for the city or for the neighbors to have to constantly call for code enforcement protection. So we respectfully ask that that you decline this.

Well, we appreciate the concerns that he has raised. At the same time, I wanted to say that the issues about the parking space from one business to another have happened to us as well. Several customers of their tienda comes over here to our parking lot and we have said nothing about it because we don't believe, you know, in ill will to our neighbors. So if they are saying so, you know, we cannot as well, you know, tell the customers don't park there if they go to their business first and they want to see the cars after. So for me, you know, we can say, you know, we also have had that issue of the parking, you know, of their customers parking in our place as well. The other issue about the standards, this morning we received our health department permit because we are following the protocols that are necessary to conduct this operation. We are going to dump the great water. We are going to put fresh water. in the installations of the Arkansas Food Innovation Center that is here in Springdale. We receive, like I said, you know, the health department permits, and we are in the process as well of receiving the health department permit for the mobile business as well. The issue of the cooking that happened in the past, it was because we were trying to do a fundraising activity during this time, so it was a long time operation. And at that point, they call the health department for us, who visit that location and explain to us how to do the safety standards before cooking. And that's why we are here putting our face, saying we are following the protocols of the health department and of the city as well. I understand, you know, that they are concerned that we are going to be offering food as well because they offer. But I think that that's America. It's about, you know, about competition. Healthy competition makes everybody better, you know, because we are a small business. It's not going to be a big scale that is going to steal customers for them. We are just offering another option. the people, you know, that enjoys our food, you know, may have as well. Thank you.

Anything else from the public? Commissioners?

So this seems like a super challenging site. Is that the only driveway as well? Okay. How would we even... And Sharon, this might be a question for you. How will we even police that, if you will? Because from all the images and everything I've seen, it is extremely congested. And the one way in, one way out, to me, is a safety concern as well. So how will we even enforce that, if you will?

It would be difficult, right? Because I don't think until upon this request for the mobile vending that the city was even aware of the expansion that had occurred since 2019 onto the site.

You mentioned you went down on your inventory as far as cars, vehicles, trying to sell vehicles?

Yes, exactly.

At what rate was that? Was that 20%, 10% as far as an inventory? Because you're stating you don't have that many vehicles on site now?

For the past two months, we have reduced about 15 cars from our inventory.

50% or 50 cars? 15 cars. 15? 15 cars.

So which was a lot of, you know, reduction there. And we will continue that because we want to offer as well better cars for the people and just have just a few cars that people can see in the lot.

Is it in compliance as a used auto dealership?

Yes, the business itself has been, is a nonconformity, but the expansion on site is not honored as a nonconformity.

Is that to the rear? Is that what you were speaking of?

Correct, to the north side. So the business license itself, they've been grandfathered and they're allowed to operate, but it was the adding of the gravel and the parameters of how big the business was.

So is that going to be remedied or what's the, what do we do with that?

It is. There's ongoing conversations about it because we know just by the aerial images that it's over the max of the 30%.

This may be more work for the city than we need to get into, but it seems to me that there definitely needs to be a site study to figure out if these two things can coexist on this lot. And if so, what does that look like?

Because I don't feel comfortable trying to hold them to a standard that I don't even know what it is.

So if they're willing to go through the process of figuring out what this looks like and what the limitations of where cars can be, where open space in this food truck can be, because I'd love to support somebody wanting to do something for themselves. I think that's great. But as is, there's so much... And like it's been stated already with just one entrance and exit, it's difficult too. So I don't know, I'm kind of rambling, but that's kind of where I'm at is if we could identify what the site should look like, can't look like, can be held accountable to and work well with this food truck, I think I would need to see that to feel comfortable. This is me personally.

Definitely we will follow, you know, whatever process is necessary. that you may help us to.

Yeah, I don't know what that is. So my thought is I don't, right now I don't have enough to make a decision on like this is where I'm at. So I don't know if this is something you could table working on it for the next 30 days and bring it back with a full, with a plan. I don't know if that's even possible or we could obviously could vote on it tonight.

THROUGHOUT SPRING, I'VE SEEN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE PASSED A LOT OF SIMILAR, SIMILAR SITUATIONS. NOW, I'LL AGREE, THIS IS DIFFICULT BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF THE CAPACITY OF VEHICLES THAT ARE THERE. AND I AGREE WITH MARK, YOU KNOW, IT'S TOUGH. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION. BUT IF WE CAN WORK TOGETHER, GET AS MANY AS LEAST POSSIBLE VEHICLES IN THE AREA. NOW, AS FAR AS THE PARKING, ONE BUSINESS PARKING, in the other business or at least consumers parking in other business. And I'd be happy to say it'd be great if we could sit there and say that's great and 100% across Springdale or any other city BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. I MEAN, I THINK THAT JUST GOES WITH TIME AND WORKING TOGETHER AND BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO FULLY SUPPORT YOU. I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE DOING, TO COME IN HERE. BUT RIGHT NOW, I JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE A DECISION. I HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO GIVE YOU THIS GRANT OR ABILITY TO CARRY ON YOUR BUSINESS. BUT AT THIS TIME, IT SEEMS IT'S A LITTLE UNSAFE.

So Sharon, just for their information, if we vote on it, what does that do? And if we table it, what does that do for them?

Yep. So if you ask them to vote on it tonight and it's denied, then you do not get your food truck request. And you're going to have to wait at least a year to come back with a request again. But if you table yourselves and come and work with us with a development plan to figure out if we can get an approved site plan for it, And then we could come back to this body once staff has an approved site plan, and you could present the request again.

I think that the second option is better for us.

Okay. Sounds good. Then we'll table this until the next meeting, and you guys should reach out as soon as possible.

If you'll call in the morning, and we'll get something scheduled.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you. All right, now we're gonna move into section six of our agenda, public hearing rezoning. But first is R26-25 Hinson Brother Investments LLC presented by Blue and Associates.

George Duquesne with Blue and Associates. We are looking at possibly rezoning I-2. We were looking at the property adjacent to us and what we did is we tried to match what they did. So we left the northern 100 feet and its current condition, I-1 zoning to kind of buffer the lower area or the area that we're rezoning from some of the northern properties over there. So we are tonight, we're requesting that just to rezone a tie to kind of match what they did to the east of us. Staff comments?

The rezoning request is in keeping with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is recommended for approval. To assure adequate land allocation for industrial growth protected from encroachment by non-industrial uses. Insulate industrial sites from other activities by providing sufficient buffers to reduce nuisance and hazard exposure to surrounding non-industrial areas. And to consolidate industrial areas near traffic arteries and collectors, rail, air facilities, and major utility trunk lines.

Any public comment? Yes, ma'am.

Hi, my name is Gay Cypert, and I own a lot just to the west of this property, which we've had for decades. That area has always been residential. There are houses to the east of the property and to the north, of course, a lot where I used to live. And I just feel like that it will be absolutely worthless if this goes through We don't know what industry will be there. It could be noisy. We don't know. That would help if we knew. But anyway, I'm just asking that not happen to have an industrial park right there in a residential area.

Ma'am. Any questions? Yes, ma'am. While understanding that it is already zoned industrial, it's just changing to a different zoning within that, correct?

I know, to heavy industrial. So, yeah, that's what I'd like to stop. And for the neighbors, I don't live there anymore, but I've lived in Springdale almost my whole 90 years, and I just hate to see encroaching. And besides, my lot, if you go to the west, is connected to another four and a half acres that our family has. It does not have access to monitoring except through that lot. We don't want anything ever built there. And it goes right up to Woodcliffe property. And I know the people up there would not want this to happen.

Are you saying west, but you mean east of this property? I don't see any residential or agriculture to the east or to the west of this property.

There are houses on Monitor Road and up over Monitor Road, east.

East, okay.

Of this property. Yes. My property is to the west.

I'm not seeing any.

It bumps right up against it.

I'm not seeing any residential to the west of this property.

Where are those houses? We've seen them. We know there's houses there. Will you go back to the zoning? Huh? Anything else?

See the image up there. Everything that's blue and light blue is all industrial.

Right, and that's my lot right to the left of it. Is that right?

If it is. I don't know anything about this. I've never been in this situation before. Sure, no, that's fine.

So I've asked a lot of questions.

But anyway, yeah, there are some houses up high.

Yeah, the yellow pieces are.

I think I can help. I've been to your house.

It's north of the property up on Woodcliffe. Thank you.

Your property is north of this property. It's up on the mountain. I don't know. The old house.

Yeah. We're not there. It's sold, but we have the four and a half acres right behind it that the only access is through the Monitor Road lot. There's a way to get to the Monitor Road.

Yeah, as you go up the bluff, but that's to the north of this because this property, you see the square is to the south of it.

But that four and a half acres is definitely residential, surely, that I have had for decades.

The wooded acreage to the north of it is agricultural right now. There's wooded acreage down below the bluff from your old house?

Yes.

Yeah, that's your property?

Well, not the one by the Woodcliffe Road. I don't know of any of that.

Yeah.

It is east and a little bit north of that.

And it may be east and north, yes. Yeah. But it's north of the property. It's in the agricultural area to the north there.

Probably so. Yeah.

Well, I can assure you we're not recommending industrial on the north side of Monitor. That's not what we're doing because we do know that there are some existing residential, and so we're not recommending any industrial on that north side.

But it is right next to my property that's just to the west. That's what I'm objecting to.

And we don't have a development plan. I'll just say for the record, we don't have a development plan submitted yet. But if anybody decides to build something here or bring a development, they'll also have to mail all the adjacent property owners another letter saying what they're going to build. And it'll have to come to this body for consideration also.

Well, the people up above, Woodcliffe, did not even know about this meeting. So they need to be informed. It So what do I do right now? Anything? Just wait and see what happens? Okay. Thank you.

Any other public comment? Yes, ma'am. Please come up to the mic.

My name is Susan Anderson, and I live at 117 Woodcliffe Circle. and we're very concerned about this for our whole neighborhood. If I'm reading the definition correctly of I-2, it says it allows outdoor storage, high levels of noise, dust, and potentially hazardous emissions provided they meet state and city requirements. So I think it would significantly impact our property and our way of life. I can't see that 100 feet of a buffer is going to protect the people across the road from Monitor Road, and certainly not our neighborhood. We have known that this whole area was zoned industrial, And we have excellent industrial neighbors at this time. But if we're looking at what that's described as, we would be very much against it. Thank you.

Thank you. Anything else from the public?

I'M ANDREW HINSON, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. WE'RE JUST, AS YOU CAN SEE UP THERE, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO rezone here is way less than what our neighbors are that already have i2 in a much much larger section there to go back to the zoning date oh yeah sorry yeah right there just there and we're just trying to uh to keep up with it and allow more opportunities for development uh on that piece of parcel and so uh that's the reason for the request i'll take any questions if anybody has any chair this is for you do you know why that's oh one

Alone is that a buffer that do you know what it's there?

It was a past buffer decision. Yeah Yeah, just to ensure that no I to actually built within that first hundred feet.

Would you be?

They are we are we that's correct. We have that you're trying to keep we just we Submitted for mirroring exactly what the force to the East is very good.

Thank you But to leave their hundred feet I won not a one to leave it. Yes.

I won correct.

I

And just to kind of point out, which you can't see it on any of these aerials, but there is a, from Monitor Road heading south, there's a pretty good drop off of that road. So I would say probably about 10 to 15 feet to this property.

Any other comments for the commission?

I was trying to look between the two. Is there like a quick summary for the ones that are concerned of the difference between I-1 and I-2 of potential? Just to answer any questions they might have. Because I don't know that the one that was read was... Yeah, I can't confirm if it was...

It may have been, but it really would come down to the differences in the uses. And really, it's that use unit 26, general industrial, which is not allowed in I-1, but is permitted in I-2. Okay.

Any other comments?

If not, this is a call for the vote. What's there right now in that area? The properties, grass? I mean, it's hard to tell.

Yeah, it's an undeveloped piece of property. The piece down below is storage. And then you can see it's kind of vacant on either side. But I mean, I did notice that we've got I-2 right next to us. And then we got I-3 catty corner from us as well. So it looks like it's really meant to be a very industrial part of the city.

And I mentioned it in the memo, but it's worth noting again that it sounds like the owner does not have a specific tenant in mind of who it's going to go to. But last year, city council did vote. They requested to come forth and then voted to allow use unit 26, general industrial, as a conditional use in an I-1 rather than requiring people to rezone to the full I-2. And so I know that they didn't have a specific tenant or business in mind, but that is another potential route.

So with that, would you be suggesting they pause on this request and wait until they have an established client and maybe do that conditional use? Is that what you're suggesting?

No, I just wanted to make sure that all of that information and that potential resource was known to all of you, just since it is kind of new. They just passed it last fall. But no, we think that the IT would be appropriate for this area.

I was going to say we would prefer to rezone it to I-2. It would give me the opportunity to put it out there to the most amount of businesses that could potentially develop on that property. And so we've had that property for a long time now and haven't had quite much interest as we'd like. And so obviously we are hoping that with an I-2 zoning, it would open it up to more businesses that could potentially go in there.

No, ma'am. At this time, we're just doing a rezone, and what's going to be there isn't anything that we can take into account. If there's no other comments, this will be a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

Mark Fuggeroos, 159 Woodcliff Way. So I've lived up there for 10 years, and I know that there's been businesses built to the west side of the mountain. And they were supposed to all be quiet, and they have not been. The sounds come up the hill 24-7. We have concerns with stuff going into the southwest. The previous businesses that have been in there were nice and quiet, and we had no problem with that. I know that there are several members of the neighborhood that are up there, that are sitting out here in this audience that do not want to speak. I do not want to speak in front of this body. but I want to do what I can to protect that neighborhood. So if you look just north of where he's talking about with a 100-foot buffer, there was a house for sale for over a million dollars. How many of you live in a million-dollar house that wants an industry put in 100 feet away from you? I don't think any one of you would want somebody to build an industry right next to you just because code allows it. That is not the place for that. There's been other stuff being built. Right there on the corner of that, there's a seven-acre lot for sale for over half a million dollars. That's going to be rezoned residential in some way, some form, multifamily, three or four houses, whatever be put in there. That's going to hinder the sale of that house, that lot, for that individual that's trying to sell that. And so I'm just going to plead with this body to deny this case. Thank you.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but we're approving or denying just rezoning from I-1 to I-2. And then if they want to come develop anything and put a business here, that's going to make noise and be loud and disturbing to the neighbors to the north. They still have to come back to this body and get that approved, correct?

Correct.

Any other comments? What does that buffer entail, just 100 feet?

Yes. And there's other buffers within the actual design standards for a development plan.

When they come forward with the plan. So when they come forward with the plan, for example, we can, depending on what they were trying to build there, or business industry, we can think of ways to buffer any kind of noise or sound, light, et cetera. Right. Okay.

If there are no other comments, this is a call for the vote. Call for the vote for the second vote. Passes six to three.

Thank you. Staff will prepare an ordinance that is going to go to City Council next Tuesday on the 9th.

Up next is R26-26, Walter White, LLC, presented by Kaitlyn Gibbs. Will Kallstrom, Watkins, Boyer, Grand Curry.

You want to do a rezone, too? I was going to say, I know nothing about it.

Do you all mind actually just tabling it momentarily and allowing me to step on it? Absolutely. Thank you. All right, we're going to move on to R26-27, P&C Steel Properties, LLC, presented by Kraft and Toll.

Good afternoon. Hunter Collins with Kraft and Toll. Here requesting to rezone roughly 58 acres from A1, C2, and I1 to W1. Here to answer any questions. Staff comments?

The rezoning request is in keeping with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is recommended for approval. Assure the development of adequate services and utilities. Take maximum advantage of railroad facilities. Consolidate industrial areas near traffic, arteries, and collectors, rail, air facilities, major utility trunk lines. So this is mainly for the W-1. And this exhibit, it's a little grainy, but that is up here where you can see the R-dot improvements that are going to be coming through right to the south.

Any public comment? Commission?

What is the top left portion going to be that butts up to that SF1?

We go back to the proposed one. The, no pun intended, the Hunter Green area color, is that what it is?

That area would be warehousing as well. It's all contained in the same parcel. The intent is to utilize the rail on that eastern side. It runs along the entire eastern portion of the property.

If there are no other comments, this is a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

Sorry about that.

Thank you very much.

Hold on one second. One second, sorry.

Go to vote again.

We had to vote up from the last item and didn't fast forward so we didn't get to the right one. Do it again. Passes nine to zero. Thank you again.

Staff is going to prepare an ordinance that's going to go to city council next Tuesday the 9th. Okay. Okay.

Thank you. All right, we're going to go back to R26-26, Walter White, LLC, presented by Caitlin Gibbs and Watkins, Boyer, Gray, and Curry.

Turns out I was on the docket today for Will. I believe that we were just asking for a rezone request on this to rezone to commercial. My understanding of the property is that the surrounding zoning, yes, there's actually some surrounding zoning that is... the adjacent parcel actually is C6 versus the commercial two. My understanding as well is that it's in line with the code and I'm just here to ask or answer any questions that you all may have regarding it.

Staff comments?

This rezoning request is in keeping with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is recommended for approval. Encourage the development of a wide range of commercial development for the residents and tourists to include neighborhood, community, and regional centers. Encourage the development of regional commercial areas that accommodate a variety of wholesale, retail, service, office uses where the highest traffic volumes, greatest utility demands can be served, and more extensive outdoor display of materials will be expected and permitted that have frontage and or access to state highways and I-49. And I believe that this site had operated previously as a used car sales lot for many, many years, right? But it hasn't been in operation. So this would really be coming a little bit more into compliance with the way that the site's already laid out.

Yes, that's my understanding as well.

Any public comment? Commissioners? If not, this is a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

TASK IS NINE TO ZERO.

STAFF WILL PREPARE AN ORDINANCE THAT'S GOING TO GO TO COUNCIL NEXT TUESDAY ON THE NINTH, OKAY?

I'LL GET THAT ONE ON MY CALENDAR. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO SECTION SEVEN, PUBLIC HEARING, CONDITIONAL USE. WE'RE GOING TO START WITH C26-09 AND B26-51, ZIO SPENCY'S PIZZA, PRESENTED BY SPENCER K. PFIZER.

Hello, good afternoon. My name is Spencer Fizer. I'm here to seek approval for a use unit 44 mobile vending in an existing C2 location. Also seeking approval for a variance for the increased mobile vending size from 160 square feet to 193 square feet and requesting variance from utility requirements to use electricity at existing utilities that are already on site.

Staff comments?

So the site's developed with an existing commercial building business paved area with the site plan showing that four of the total 28 parking spaces could be designated for the proposed food truck operations. And my notes here is that in 2022, we actually, we had a conditional use approved resolution 45-22 for a mobile vending, but that never started the actual operation. We've noted the variance request for bigger than 160 square feet, the utility connection. All of the other requirements seem to have been met. Separation, parking spots, signage, their proposed hours, ADA and distance. And so the additional restrictions on mobile vending sites from code, the conditions that we will propose, parking and loading areas identified. may not operate between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. No obstruction of parking spaces is required for the operation of any other use on the site. Maintain on the site a minimum of three parking spaces designated for their use. If a health certificate is required, display the health certificate in a manner visible to customers. No obstruction of pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic flow. No obstruction of traffic signals or regulatory signs. No vending upon a public way. No sound device that produces a loud or raucous noise in violation with city ordinance or violation of any other city ordinances in connection with the vending operation. Keep the vending sites clean, free of paper or refuse of any kind generated from the operation of the business. All trash and debris accumulating within 20 feet of any vending stand shall be collected and deposited into a trash container. Submission of approved gray water disposal by Springdale Water Utilities. Submission of approved grease disposal method, approved by Arkansas Department of Health, and all signs must meet the requirements, temporary sign, Chapter 98, no flashing signs or lights allowed.

Any public comment?

Do you know how long your food truck is?

Excuse me?

How long your food truck is?

It was about 25 feet, maybe in some change. It's in my document. I think it was 25 and 6 inches or something like that.

That's the only concern I have. That parking stall normally is 18 to 22 for an angled parking, so that's going to stick out a bit. I don't know if that's something that would... not qualify for some of the rules you read, Officer Aaron, about blocking traffic flow?

If you look in the picture here, the idea would be for that food truck to back in where that truck is existing, so it would hang over into the grassy area.

The green space.

Yes, sir. We would want to make sure that we keep a clear 24 feet for that traffic on the side.

Okay.

More utilities noted there, that's where you guys are hooking up to your utilities at?

Yes, there's an existing electrical hookup at that place.

You guys get to do the variances together?

Sure.

If so, it's a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

Variances passed nine to zero. The conditional use would also be a call for the vote. That also passes 9-0.

Staff will prepare a resolution that's going to go to City Council next Tuesday on the 9th, okay?

Thank you very much. Appreciate your time.

Up next, we'll move into Section 8, Preliminary Plots, Re-Plots, and Final Plots. I'll start with FP 26-04, Creekfront 49, presented by ESI.

Hello, everyone. Josh Haley with ESI here. Tonight we're asking for approval of the final plat for Creekfront 49, and I'm here happy to answer any questions y'all may have.

Staff comments? In addition to standard comments, planning has a few. Include the landscape notes from the preliminary plat PP2514. The notes will need to be updated to reflect the dedication for Lot 6 as being dedicated per this plat. add the resolution number for the developer agreement, cost share resolution 163-25, provide ingress and egress information for lot six, and then show all parent parcel information as well as the track descriptions and then the new legal descriptions on the plot.

Engineering standard comments submit final plot checklist items finish the punch list and pass re-inspection And I'd appreciate if we could have an update on grading when we were out there did not seem that grading had been complete and Stabilization vegetation had not begun Not sure if we had any movement on that yet

I'll talk to the owner in the morning, and I'll get an update. I had sent him an email. I just hadn't heard back from him yet, but I'll touch base, and then I'll give you a call in the morning.

Any comment from the public? Commissioners?

When I read the packet, it seemed like that they hadn't stood up to their end of the bargain as far as mitigating runoff, stormwater, all the things that happened during construction development. Is that correct?

Right, this site is challenging because the improvements that they made compared to the amount of grading on the site is pretty outsized. So there was a lot of grading still going on. So we'll need to get these lots to close to final grade as shown on the preliminary plat and start some vegetation and stabilization before we approve this or, you know, sign it and file it. We have not been out for that follow-up final inspection yet. So I haven't seen what progress they've made since we went out there a couple weeks ago.

But they met the threshold whenever they at least submitted that 80 or 90? That's correct. Okay.

And I guess I'll mention this is an interesting plot as well because we do have two approved large-scale developments in this subdivision. And so there's just a lot going on. We've got lot seven and lot two under development. So obviously those are kind of separate from the other lots which just need to come to grade and be vegetated.

Can you go to the lot split, whoever's controlling this? Thank you. Up, back, thank you. Yeah, you definitely see two, I remember it. You can see it from the highway. I guess we're lucky we don't have houses around this development.

Any other comments? If not, this would be a motion subject to staff comments. So motion.

Second.

Passes nine to zero.

Staff will, well, for the final plat, we'll need you to submit an ordinance. If you want to be heard next Tuesday, it would be by the end of today tomorrow. But I just will, just FYI, that all the outstanding comments that are on the memo would also have to be addressed. So we would have to get a revised plat that showed kind of the final product if we wanted before we would go ahead and submit it for council next Tuesday. So just keep that in mind. Okay, we can do that. Thank you. Thank you.

Next, we'll move into large-scale developments, L26-10 ServPro, as well as B26-57 and W26-22. Thank you.

Evening, Nathan Street with SiteWise Civil Engineering. Before you tonight is a proposed... 6,150 square foot office with attached 13,850 square foot warehouse with 37 proposed parking stalls on the 3.42 acre site zoned I-1. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Staff comments?

For planning, revise the typo within the roll-off dumpster call-out on the site plan. Revise the limits of disturbance on the landscaping plan in relation to the dumpster enclosure. show the irrigation system or location of the hose bibs. And variance B2657 has been requested for the following, an increase in the maximum width of the proposed eastern drive from 40 feet to 56 feet, frontage landscaping, as well as perimeter landscaping. The existing eastern tree canopy is to be preserved and partial northern perimeter landscaping is proposed. And lastly, we have the waiver W2622, which has been requested.

For engineering, this site has a future collector on the east side on the Master Street plan, so they have requested a waiver from those half-street improvements, but they're dedicating the right-of-way. We don't have any immediate plans to build this collector at this time.

Did you say they did dedicate right-of-way?

That's correct. Thank you.

Any public comment?

Commissioners? So the landscaping you said that they're going to leave existing, is that enough if it wasn't there to meet the needs of what would be, I guess, requested?

So staff would typically assess the existing landscaping on site. We normally would have them call out what is out there so that we have a good survey idea for what to expect. And if the intent of that perimeter landscaping screening is met, then we will work with the applicant.

If there's no other comment, we'd start with the waiver, which is a motion to forward to council with recommendation of denial or approval.

Second.

Passes nine to zero. That would be a call for the vote. Call for the vote. Also passes nine to zero. Lastly, we've got the large scale development, which is a motion subject to staff comments.

So motion.

It also passes 9-0.

Staff will prepare a resolution for the waiver request that's going to go to council next Tuesday. You're not required to be there, but encouraged.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Up next, we're moving into public hearing form-based code. First up is FB26-09, Railside Parking Edition, presented by Ferdinand Forey.

Hi, I'm with A4 Civil. This request is to reduce the green space requirement to allow some additional parking on the north side of the rail side development. And we're proposing 18 spaces which, you know, would alleviate some of the parking spaces that were lost previously on the south side where we're doing the hotel project.

Staff comments?

Just as a quick reminder, since this is the form-based code in C1, is that there is a requirement that it set off at least 30 feet and then not visible via some sort of screening element. And so they're proposing this parking close to a street, side street. and without the screening, am I correct?

Well, we'll provide a landscape screening with evergreen shrubs along. But not like a street wall, an opaque street wall. Not the street wall, yes, and then the reduction of the green space from 30 to 15 or 10 feet on one side. It's gonna be angled parking, so it'll vary.

And will it be private parking for the tenants?

No, well, it would be tenants for the commercial space that's there. I mean, previously, a lot of the parking happened across the street. That's not possible anymore, so this has been much-needed parking spaces. And previously, I think when they did the railside, that lot was actually owned by somebody else, so that's why it couldn't be part of the original development. Otherwise, it probably would have been proposed as parking at that point.

Any public comment?

Commissioners? Currently, right now, it's just grass, green space.

Yeah.

If there are no other comments, this is a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

Passes eight to one. Thank you. Up next is Board of Adjustments. We'll start with B26-39, Eagle Carports, presented by Charles Hyatt.

Good evening. My name is Charles Hyatt, and I'm here on behalf of Eagle Carports. I'm here to request to not plant the native trees and shrubs along the back and both sides of our property. We do plan on trying to successfully plant native trees and shrubs along the front in hopes they will survive. We hired MTA engineers, a local company, to perform geotechnical engineering exploration for us at Eagle Carports. The purpose was to retrieve, or the purpose was to review general surface and subsurface conditions of our property. While this was done for purposes OF DETERMINING THE BEARING CAPABILITIES OF THE SOIL'S INSTABILITY FOR FOUNDATION AND PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION, WE WERE ABLE TO SEE THE TYPES OF SOILS. IT WAS FOUND THAT SOFT, SILTY CLAY MATERIAL WAS PRESENT IN THE OVER 24 INCHES. WHEN IT COMES TO PLANTS AND TREES, THIS PROPOSES A MAJOR ISSUE WITH POOR DRAINAGE, LOW OXYGEN LEVELS AND POTENTIAL FOR A BATHS OF EFFECT. IN PARTICULAR, THE RED AND BROWN CLAY. The tan sand is difficult for plants because it lacks nutrients and has poor water retention. The light brown silty clay is difficult for the plants because it is highly compacted, holds excessive moisture, and can turn into hard concrete when dried. THE DENSE RED, TAN, AND GRAY CLAY PREVENTS PLANT GROWTH, PRIMARILY DUE TO POOR AERATION, WATER LOGGING, AND EXTREME COMPACTION THAT RESTRICTS GROWTH. EAGLE CORPORATE HAS PURCHASED SOD AND HAD IT PLANTED AT THE RETENTION POND IN WHICH IT DIED WITHIN A MONTH OF BEING INSTALLED. Due to the failed sod and the geotechnical engineering exploration report, we feel as though the planting of native trees and plants along both sides and the back of our property is non-viable, so will result in high mortality rates. We will be setting these trees and plants to fail. This will not be a functional asset to the property. Eagle Corporates is willing to attempt to plant native trees and plants in the front to see if the soil there is viable enough to sustain life.

Thank you. Any staff comments?

So I reviewed the geotech report, and then I also pulled the soil survey from the USDA. These soils are not unique to this site. These are the soils that are across the entire city. We have a lot of chert. We have a lot of clay. I don't think that this is a barrier for planting trees. I think that we would be happy to help you pick the right trees that would have the best success of growing and that were suited to this soil type.

And, sir, do you mind clarifying one more time? You said you are willing to plant native trees and shrubs to meet the front-edge landscaping requirements?

Yes.

Okay. And then would you also meet your parking lot landscaping requirements?

Yes. Okay. And also, I'd like to note, like, on the side is the railroad tracks, and the very back is, like, a field and woods, wooded area.

Any public comment? Commissioners? So based on this image that we're looking at, this was what you presented or the Engel Carports presented to us for approval. So what I'd like to see is what you are willing to do. Like I want to see a landscape plan of what you will do before I can vote yes or no. That's me. Because basically you're asking me to not do any of this, and I'm not willing to do that. 100%.

Just for clarification, are you saying no planting or just not native?

Just not native. And for the back and sides.

I do agree with Mark that we want to see a plan for what you would intend to show, and then I think that would help us make a better decision.

Okay. It's just hard to approve when we don't know what you're going to do. We know what you don't want to do. We get that, but I think it's just easier if you come with a new landscape plan and say, this is what we propose. It's much easier to review and agree with.

Would you like to table it until next month and come back with that for us to review at that point? Yes. All right, thank you. You're welcome.

Thank you. You can call the planning office tomorrow morning, and we'll get something scheduled so we can talk to you as quick as soon as possible, okay? Okay, sounds good.

Thank you.

Up next is B26-42, Clintina Floyd.

Good evening. I'm Quintina Floyd. I'm at 4803 Bonita Place. My reason here is variance for reduction of my front setback from 25 to zero. If you have any questions, let me know.

What would you be doing to necessitate the need to go all the way out to the street?

No, I would not go all the way out to the street.

To zero.

That's what zero means?

You're asking for a setback to go all the way to zero. So why do you need to go all the way to zero is my question.

Because I want to put a carport in. I don't want to go to the street. I want to stop where the sidewalk is.

Any staff comments?

So front setbacks are important for providing sight distances for vehicles backing out of the driveways. I do think reducing this to zero could be a safety issue if the carport is not open on all sides. We just don't know what kind of carport or how far exactly it would go to be able to determine whether that would be a safety issue or not. But I think we had talked about 10 to 15 feet might be reasonable.

Typically, we haven't seen many go below 10 just for that site potential. Have you measured out the carport?

Roughly, the rough estimates that I sent in, 22, 27, that's me roughly guessing. That's not my gift, that's not my talent. So I just, rough estimates.

Ed, does the carport need to be 10 feet from the house? Sorry, Mr. Stith. I was too informal.

It could be attached to the house. If it's attached to the house, it wouldn't have to be 10 feet away from the house. Yes, it will be attached to the house. Yeah, then it's an addition. It does not have to be 10 feet away from the house.

Is it open carport?

Yes, when you say open, like the front and back would be open?

Or sides? Tell me what is open that you're looking at.

This process was gonna be bad. So ideally it's gonna be closed on the side and then open in the front and the back.

I'm assuming, are you mainly doing this for hail damage and shading and things like that? That's it. Understood.

Katie, I know you're not the carport expert, but I would think that the sides would hinder some of the site.

I think depending on how long it is, yeah, those sides just could cause a hazard just because you won't be able to see too well when you're backing up. As hard as your piece of property is like that triangle shape, do you think you would put it on like the long side of the driveway, that 27-foot side? Or have you thought about it?

I would like to put it over the whole thing if possible.

Okay, so it would be like for two or three car, two car wide, okay. Because, I mean, your standard passenger car is somewhere between 15 to 20 feet long. You'd think probably that would be about how long the carport would be, about 20 feet long.

Yeah, because my car right now is 18.

18, okay.

And I wouldn't go any bigger than what I currently have if I get another car.

So we've got 25. The car is only 18 feet long. Maybe we can round up to 20. I don't know. I mean... I think zero is hard to get is what I'm saying.

I'm not opposed to 10 feet because when you say 10 feet, I can go 10.

I think that's a more reasonable ask.

Okay.

So you want to modify your request from 25 to 0 to 25 to 10?

I'm like, who's talking?

Maybe. Sorry.

Just raise your hand. I'm like, I don't feel great. Sorry. My bad.

Would you like to modify your request to change your setback from 25 to 0 instead to be 25 to 10?

Yes.

Okay.

Any comment from anyone on that? Is there a separate process in reviewing the carport or? Is that done by right, so to speak, or through Mr. Stitt?

Yeah, she'll have to present a site plan to the billing department and get a residential addition.

That's what I thought. Thank you.

Yeah, and since I'm talking anyway, the carport has to be open on two sides.

Okay.

If there's no other comments, this will be a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

Passes nine to zero.

Question. Do y'all send out notes, like all the stuff that y'all are saying I need to do? You know, I just want to make sure. We can.

If you want to call the planning office in the morning, we are happy to give you a recap and help you with the next steps onto the building project. Thank you.

Thank you.

That was a great question, by the way.

Thank you. Up next is B26-43, Franklin and Sarah Waskura, presented by Franklin and Sarah.

Thank you.

Basically, all we're doing is there was a double-wide mobile home located there.

Sir, could you just introduce yourself for us?

Oh, sorry. I'm Franklin Waskura. Sorry about that. SO THE SITE WITH THE YELLOW AROUND IT. THERE WAS A DOUBLE WIDE MOBILE HOME THERE. MY FATHER-IN-LAW WAS THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THAT LAND AND THE MOBILE HOME. HE HAD THAT MOVED. AND THE PLAN IS TO BUILD A HOUSE, SAME LOCATION, TWO-STORY HOUSE. THERE'S THE SITE PLAN. So basically, we like to maintain the A1, which would allow us to have some chickens on the property. We have 11 chickens. I have six kids, and we're involved in the Washington County Fair, so just be able to teach them kind of how to raise chickens, stuff like that, and be able to put chickens in the fair. Just be able to like to be able to do that and also build a house big enough for my family. And then the other one, talking to you guys, we weren't exactly sure if we needed it or not. But so the road right there is, it's actually on my property right there. It's a private, the whole road's a private road. Like everybody's land just kind of continues. It used to be a dirt road. That's why it's a dusty lane. BUT THE 170 FEET, WE'RE ASKING A VARIANCE FOR THAT, BECAUSE THE ASPHALT STOPS BASICALLY WHERE THE DRIVEWAY WOULD GO, AND THEN THE LAND CONTINUES ANOTHER 30 FEET. SO WE WEREN'T EXACTLY SURE IF WE NEEDED THAT, BUT WE PUT IT IN THERE FOR THE 170 VERSUS, YOU KNOW, 200, SO. AND FOR EVERYBODY ON THE, IT'S A DEAD-END ROAD, AND IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE PROPERTY VALUE OF EVERYBODY ON THAT ROAD, SO. Any staff comments?

Anything for the public? Commissioners? Call for the vote.

Passes 9-0. Thank you. And thank you for letting my family witness how this all works.

Up next is B26-45, Dipper Heights, LLC, presented by Engineering Services, Inc. Hello, everyone.

Josh Haley with ESI. For this one, we're asking for a... VARIANCE TO THE SIDE SETBACK. WE HAVE AN EXISTING GARAGE ON OUR SITE, AND IT'S, WE RECENTLY REZONED THE PARCEL LAST YEAR, I THINK, AND THAT SETBACK PUSHED IT TO BE A 10-FOOT SIDE SETBACK, AND WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR THAT TO GET VARIANCED, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

STAFF COMMENTS? ANYTHING FROM THE PUBLIC? Commissioners? If none, this is a call for the vote. Call for the vote. Passes nine to zero. Thank you. Up next is B26-46, Masters of Disasters, presented by William Baskin.

William Baskin, and what we're proposing to do is we want to raise our sign up to 70 foot and make it 10 by 30 to do our own personal advertising there on the LED sign. And it'll be situated right there at the end of our parking lot, as you can see, and it'll reach from that back corner of the parking lot to two foot from our fence. it'll be facing towards the north.

Any staff comments?

No, and then just to point out, the agenda has what the request is, because the maximum that they are supposed to have in that one is 30 and 150 square feet for the sign face. And then just a question, are you going to be advertising for other businesses, or is it just... No, it's just for our company.

but like when we have water heater cells or an AC, we do plumbing, leak location, septic systems, we do lining of cast iron pipe, and then we do heating and air.

Kind of in the Springdale portion, up and down the highway, what's the typical? Are there a lot that go outside of the 30 or?

I mean, not a ton. I can't think of a reference one on the top of my head.

Yeah, I was curious about the signs that are on Elm Springs exit, the McDonald's, Penn Express.

Now, there are sign overlay areas, right? Sure. So off the top of my head, I don't have the code chapter 90 up right in front of me, but certain areas do have certain regulations, even if it's zoned the same.

Question from Mia. Do you happen to know, does someone live at that single-family house right to the south of you at Bob Mills, on Bob Mills Road, 4797? Bob Mills?

So the easiest way to identify this, the Masters of Disasters, they had a recent large-scale development. That's how I know it, because it's the newer build out there on 48th.

Yeah, it's way.

Oh, you're asking if anyone does reside in that one just directly south of it?

Yes. The other property we own south of it? Yes, we have somebody resides in that property.

But you own that property, that single-family home?

Yes, we own that property also.

If there are no other comments, this is a call for the vote.

Call for the vote.

This does not pass, five to four.

You will have the opportunity to appeal. Okay. Mr. Baskin, real quick. You have the right to appeal the planning commission's decision tonight, but you need to put that in writing. within 15 days and submit it to our office if you do want to appeal, and then we'll put you on one of the next city council meetings, and you can always bring it to them.

Okay.

Okay? And also, would it make any difference if we lowered the sign by 10 foot?

I think it's just really hard to approve a sign that's that. I mean, I think what the code says or what the... what our standard heights and widths are, I think we're comfortable with. Doesn't speak anything toward your company. You do great work. Very familiar with you. Love your sign on your building currently. So just personally, I'm just trying to get away with a bunch of signage everywhere. It's just toxic to me. So to go outside of what's standard just doesn't make any sense to me. That's all. Thank you, though.

Up next is B26-48, Eric Saldana and Yosandi Ponce.

Good afternoon. My name is Eric Saldana. Address is 3944 Silver Fox Street. And all I'm asking is for an increase in height on our rear fence. The staff comment. From six feet to eight feet.

Any staff comment?

I was looking at this plat, and I did notice there was a 20-foot drainage easement on the south side of the property. So I think I understand that you already have a fence on that south side, but I just wanted to say we always recommend placing those fences outside the drainage easement so that they don't block the flow of stormwater.

Correct. We do have fence all around the property. The only... I'm all I'm doing is just replacing the current fence, which was pretty old and kind of falling apart, and obviously increasing the height. That's all I'm doing.

Does the blue line in this image, does that represent fences there that you're not changing the height of?

Correct. That one's going to continue to stay at six feet. Got it. Just the yellow portion will be the eight feet.

I'm assuming for privacy reasons.

Correct.

The pool in the backyard. Yes, sir.

And your property just slopes down, I'm assuming. It does.

And that area, actually the area where the trampoline is and the side, it's actually now it's cemented and there's a four-foot retainer wall. Actually, it's a three-foot retainer wall, sorry. So it kind of puts us even higher than, you know, the fence when you're standing up there. So not only for our privacy, but also for the neighbor in the back. I mean, I can stand in my patio and see a yard.

Any public comment? If there are none others from commissioners or staff, this is a call for the vote. Call for the vote. PASSES NINE TO ZERO. THANK YOU. UP NEXT IS B26-50, WEBER FAMILY REVOKABLE LIVING TRUST, PRESENTED BY ROLAND WEBER.

MY NAME'S ROLAND WEBER. MY WIFE CINDY AND I HAVE LIVED AT 1702 WILLARD STREET FOR 24 YEARS, AND WE'VE BEEN CITIZENS HERE IN SPRINGFIELD FOR 50 YEARS. WE'RE ANSWERING THE LETTER ON THE VARIANCE UNDER THE WEBER FAMILY TRUST. represented by Cindy and Rollin, a Weber trustees. Last summer, I built a cover on the patio as a freestanding unit. On May 11th, I received a notice from Mr. Evans or Evers stating that the structure may have been within the side setbacks. I visited him on May 12th at the city office. The patio cover was built as a freestanding unit. AND NOT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE. MR. EVERS DID SHARE WITH ME THAT EVEN THOUGH THE ROOF COVER WAS NOT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE, IT IS NOT CONSIDERED A FREESTANDING UNIT. AND THEREFORE, SINCE THE POST WERE ANCHORED IN THE GROUND, THAT IT BECOMES, THEREFORE, DOES NOT HAVE THE SIDE SETBACKS. I SUBMITTED THE DRAWING AND THE PHOTOS FOR THE PATIO COVER FOR YOUR REVIEW. If you reference the drawings, you will see that the closest point from our patio roof cover to the overhang is represented by the diagonal line in purple. Yes, I do see that. However, it's not showing the whole picture to the house on the left. I also submitted a photo showing the overhang on 1702 and to the corner on the adjacent house. And I do not see that in the agenda when I clicked on it, but that was also submitted to the city. And it looks similar to this if they do not have that, which is showing the overhang on the structure that was built and then the diagonal line to the corner of the next property. I HAVE FILED AND OF COURSE WHAT I'M REFERENCING TO IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE CORNER OF THAT AND THE CORNER TO THE NEXT HOUSE IS WELL ABOVE THE 1600 OR 16 FOOT REQUIREMENT I FILED A REQUIRED PAPERWORK AND NOTIFIED SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS I'VE RECEIVED ALL THE GREEN CARDS BACK EXCEPT ONE and we have followed the request of the city. So we're here tonight to request a variance for the reduction of the setback. Any questions?

Any staff comments? Anything from the public? Commission? Yes, ma'am, or yes, sir.

We're neighbors. My mom is a neighbor.

Sir, could you tell us your name, please?

Michael Hannon. Now, the picture he's showing isn't far enough. See right here where the property line is, the grass? He's got two themselves coming. down and it's all going right under mom's fence and right at the back corner of her house. It's already trying to eat out underneath her foundation. He has a drain right here. A fridge drain. A fridge drain that he can tie into and bring all his storm water down to the curb and let it go into the street. My mom went over and asked you if you could turn them downspouts that she was flooding her out. And you know what she said to her? I know. When I said, Roland, you're flooding me out, it was, I know.

And then he told me that I had to go get me some sod and put it down on my side.

Ma'am, could you please state your name?

I'm Vivian Bohannon. I'm the owner of the property. And where the water comes down on my side, and of course, I didn't know I could do pictures like this. Of course, I'm not smart enough on the computer to do it in the first place. But I have pictures showing what my yard looks like where I usually, on that corner, I planted cucumbers and my tomatoes. Well, I can't do it because it stands in water most of the time. And I know, you know, we get rain and it dries up and all that stuff. But these spouts that Roland has here come out.

Straight to her house.

And they're only five foot from my fence. I don't care what other stuff y'all say. It's five foot from my fence. And it's washing my stuff out. I have pictures showing you what the fence looks like on my side that shows you that I've got nothing but rocks there now because all my dirt's gone. And I have a gate on that side of the fence, and already it's washed out under the fence where...

I don't see why he didn't get a building permit to begin with. The man built Sears stores all over the United States. He knows to get building permits. And he just decided, well, it'd be cheaper to pay the fine than it will to, you know, build. So I'm asking that y'all don't allow this, that he's got to do something with that runoff water. Because now that's considered runoff water, stormwater drains.

Mr. Reber told me that I was just on the downslope. Yes, I am on the downslope of the hill. And that's fine. That's where we bought the house. It was there originally. But I didn't get excess stormwater from a new building that's been put up there that has two large downspouts.

Well, he's got one downspout already tied in to the French drain. So he can tie the others into the French drain. and push all that water out to the front.

I feel that I have not had access to what I should have had to talk to anybody. Someone came and talked to Mr. Weber about the building or whatever he put up there. But they didn't come over and talk to me. They didn't come look at my yard. I was home. I'm home all the time, pretty much. There was no reason that whoever came and talked to him did not come and see my problem.

It sounds like we, correct me if I'm wrong, but have two situations here. One, where we have the structure in which they were given the citation for, and it sounds like there's no major concerns from building or fire for the five foot, but then the separate issue sounds like the stormwater runoff.

I realize that, but if he had gotten his building permit, he would not have been allowed to build within five foot of my yard, it would have been eight foot as it's supposed to be. But since that didn't happen, now the downspouts are five foot from my fence. And I'm the one that's having to deal with it.

And I'm the one- Yeah, I'm her son. I've got to deal with it.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But what really upset and started the aggravation is when I went to Roland and said, Roland, you're flooding me out. He was sitting at his kitchen table, and he said, yeah, I know. And that right there. is what started every bit of this. If he had said, Vivian, I'm sorry, I'll take care of it, this would have never happened. But when I told my son what was said, he was infuriated also because he has to help take care of my problems. I'm 85 years old. I should not have to deal with this.

Take that issue out of it. Not discounting it, but saying, yeah, I don't. have concerns from, usually it's fire that we worry about from being close to wood and stuff. I'm sorry. Typically on situations like this, we worry about fire. And this is a new one on me that the water and the downspouts, but I would think there would be something that could be worked out to definitely, we, we might can put some.

Yeah. I'll take care of it. We wouldn't even be here.

Because I asked, I said, well, can you not, you know, you have those little things that you put on the end of your downspouts. I have them on mine. Put one on that and shoot it into his yard, point it in his, because he's got a ways to go before he gets to his fence. And it wouldn't have been in my yard. Well, it might have been some of it eventually, but the majority of it would have went down. And then he could have already, one of his downspouts, could be added to his French drain that's there. Sure, it's going to cost a little bit of work for him, but hey, he's the one that created the problem. I'm not.

Thank you.

I'll be happy to address it.

Sure. Vivian did come over to our house. I took her out back, showed her the downspout. She requested I would turn it 90 degrees. She'd be happy. I do not remember making any comment. First of all, I'm here because of the variance in the letter that I got from Mr. Evers had nothing to do with water running downhill. We live on Willard Street where we get all the water from 1710 to 1708 to 1706 to 1704 to downhill. Okay, we also get water running from Cary Street downhill to us. If you go back, well, that's good enough right there. The photo on the left, now that I've put the cover up, half of the water now goes onto my roof in both directions and into a French drain. So if I did anything and I decreased the amount of water THAT WAS GOING ON TO THE LOWER PROPERTY BY BUILDING THE COVER. THE SECOND THING IS IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PHOTO, YOU WILL SEE THAT 80% OF THE WATER THAT'S GOING IN THE CORNER THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IS COMING OFF OF A ROOF. MA'AM, COULD YOU LET THEM SPEAK, PLEASE? is into a French drain. Well, if it is, then water coming off my roof ought to go in the French drain, too. Folks, we're here to talk about a variance.

We're not here to talk about water and runoff, just whether or not the variance should be granted. We've heard comments from both sides. We appreciate your points and positions. If your property is being encroached upon by water, I think there are other avenues that you could look into, but this commission tonight, specifically during this variance discussion, is not the place for that. But there are no other comments. We're going to take comments from the commissioners and then we're going to vote. Any other public comments? Anything from the Planning Commission?

Not sure how we arrive at this, but I think what I would like to say is if Mr. Weber was willing to redirect his water to remain on his property, I would be for the variance request. If he's not willing to redirect the water To remain on his property, I would be against it. I'm not sure how we navigate that, but that's where I'm at.

I will say, I just, I do, I hesitate. I would almost look to Katie's advice, but the sentence of keeping the water on his property, just knowing the water has no boundaries.

Well, I guess my point is he's currently five foot from our fence. If he built this to our code, it'd be eight foot. And maybe we'd have the same problem, maybe we wouldn't. But the bottom line is he's asking for a variance. So for me to feel good about the variance request, I would like to know that at least the downspouts are redirected to immediately you stay on this property, then it flow as it naturally did before he built this patio, which is a nice looking patio, by the way. But, yeah, I understand her complaint. You put water off your roof line five foot from her fence, where before you can see the house, it used to be probably 15 feet from her fence. So you've encroached upon her with water. I think it's neighborly to resolve that. I don't know how that makes sense.

And I know it's not the water issue that we're here for tonight. but it's a continuing issue because I have hauled in 30 rolls of sod over the past few years to continue to build a barrier from the street above me coming down. When Harold was alive, her husband, the two of us would maintain the fence on both sides by bringing in water or dirt every year or every other year. And so I know that hasn't happened since he's passed away.

That's not true. Harold never brought any dirt in there.

He did with me.

I'm sorry. This is ridiculous. Because if he would have gotten his permit... We would not be here. Absolutely.

That may be true, but I thought I was building a freestanding unit, which had a two-foot setback instead of an eight-foot. So Tom Evans did explain that to me.

What is our setback on freestanding? He may be right, I don't know.

Only portable buildings are allowed to be put in the eight-foot setback area. So it would have to have been a portable building, and it would have to have been less than 120 square feet.

And he did explain that to me. But that was after the fact, so that's...

My question is, why, if someone came to talk to Roland after my son complained to the city, why would he not give me the opportunity to come and look at my problem?

No one came to me. I came to the city.

That was after Mike came to the city and complained at what was happening for his mom.

Yeah. I don't have an answer for you directly of why nobody visited you. Usually it's a good thing if a city inspector doesn't come to visit you. Usually it's not a welcomed visit. However, I'm happy if you want to call the planning office, we're happy to try and get with you. No promises because I don't fully understand what all this full problems or issues that you're having. But if there's ways, whether it's mitigation tips or resources issues, from staff or if we can help better understand whatever the concerns on your particular property are, we're happy to at least look into it and see what we can do and if there's resources or help that we can provide.

I'll be happy to turn the downspout. That's not an issue. The water still runs downhill.

It'll correct what's coming off of my roof, but it will not correct what's coming off of Carrie or any, the whole neighborhood goes downhill, so I can't correct that.

It's never been a problem until you did that.

That's the problem, Ellen. Two big downspouts directed directly at my fence within five feet. Now, if you did the eight feet where you should have, it wouldn't have been that bad. It would have been into your yard some, and it would have absorbed a lot of it before it ever got to my fence. I'm the one that paid for the fence to be put up in the first place.

No, ma'am.

I did half of it with you.

You did not give me.

So part of the variance, just like Mark was saying, I would feel comfortable with, if we're going to do it, would be you mitigate it as much as possible to redirect them. No problem. Okay. That would be a must for... No problem.

How do we follow up with that? How do we make sure that happens? I want to make sure we represent both of our...

We can note that as part of the variance, because in order to get this fully resolved, we'll have to give the building department the information on the variance passed, and we'll go ahead and note that as part of the request that was on the record from the commissioners.

Do we need his permission to go on his property and paint the fence?

Because the fence is six inches over on the wall.

I don't, that's not an issue that we have any authority to weigh in on.

Wait a minute. I didn't know it was six inches over.

It is.

If it is, then that gives me six inches more grace.

Oh, big deal.

All right. If there are no other comments on this, this will be a call for the vote.

Before we do a call for a vote, so the variance request... What we're reviewing is we are saying that we either approve the variance request or deny based on the fact that it is five foot, three foot beyond where it should be, but Mr. Weber will have to mediate the water by redirecting it a different direction to normal satisfaction by the city. Call for the vote.

Passes eight to one. Thank you. Up next is B26-52 and 26-53 Hale Lane, presented by Taylor McBride.

Hi, and good afternoon. My name's Taylor McBride. My company is Natural State Engineering. We are looking for two variances at this point. First one would be for to shorten up the building setback. And it's kind of weird right now because There used to be two pieces of property, and the setbacks were different on each side. On the right side, it's like at 11 feet or something like that. We don't need quite 11. We're trying to aim to just go back to the 20 feet that the utility easement is actually at, kind of make a formulated flow. don't really have any desire to go to that 11 feet that the other sides had. So it seemed kind of like a mute point for that. Uh, the other thing was, uh, the second variance is a landscape and variance cause we are going to be, um, we would like to be able to put a parking, uh, in front of the long buildings and, uh, we would be, um, angling parking spots in order to be able to fix it. Long story short is, um, We're asking for a variance for the landscaping around the foundation, because quite honestly, there just isn't the room to fit everything there. That's kind of the ins and outs of it, and I am glad to answer any questions that you may have for me. Any staff comments? Anything from the public?

Commission?

Is that perfect paving that I see around the building?

Yes, sir. We're going to use pavers to mediate all the stormwater coming off, and we're actually in that middle part. That'll be kind of like the chief underground storage for all of our stormwater.

Love it. Thank you.

It's good to do the two variances together? Yes. Call for the vote. Call for the vote. Passes nine to zero.

Thank you. Hey, and I really want to say, working with Springdale Planning has been great. I mean, I've been all over Northwest Arkansas. It's been a real pleasure. Thank you all very much.

Thank you. Thank you. Up next is B26-54 Worth Lane Event Center, presented by James and Sarah Gertz.

I'm Sarah Gertz with EDA, and our request is to allow a shared parking agreement with an adjacent property owner for the Worth Lane Event Center. 25% of the parking is allowed by code, and if you want access to that, it has to be a variance. The property owner, the church adjacent, has no problem with this, and He has already signed paperwork saying he's okay with sharing parking spaces. It's a total of 33. Actually, the churches, as you can see to the north, the church's asphalt comes down to the Worth Lane. Yeah, you can see it well there. And actually, their southern entrance and exit is on our client's property there. Any staff comments? Any questions?

So just for reference, like Sarah mentioned, the maximum ratio of off-site parking is 25%. So with this request, it would be going up to 50% off-site.

So just to make sure I'm clear, you're adding parking to the existing parcel with this particular building on it? Is that correct? Yes.

So this project was approved. It came through. And then the property owner was... thinking, well, can I maximize the usage of this existing building any? And if he did, he would need more parking. So he's going through that process to see if he can do that.

So you've put as much parking as you can on the site. Now you're asking to also share parking with the church to your north to add more parking as needed.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

And you mentioned a shared parking agreement. Do you have that signed by them, by the church? Have they signed it and agreed to it?

I do.

If there are no other comments, this is a call for the vote. Call for the vote. Passes nine to zero.

Thank you.

Thank you. Up next, we're moving into waivers. First up is W26-21, Jacob Tankersley, presented by Jacob Tankersley.

Good afternoon. I'm Jacob Tankersley. I'm requesting a sidewalk waiver. I have a client who we have built a custom home for on this piece of property. We are... actually complete. And the city ordinance, I guess, for this area is to have an eight foot sidewalk both on Robbins Road and the road to the east as well. So this property would have to have two eight foot sidewalks. There are no sidewalks around this area. So I would be the only property in the area, so the sidewalk would connect to no one and no thing. Any staff comments?

Anything from the public?

Would it make sense at least to consider a right-of-way dedications for, I don't know if there's any other levels that would make sense for the future for whatever expansions?

If they were willing. I don't think right now before us we have a mechanism to require it. So if there was like a development plan or a property line adjustment would trigger that where we would require it. But we will always ask and encourage. Would you dedicate the proper right-of-way on both sides of the piece of property? That is not my decision to make.

Okay. And my owner is not here tonight.

Okay, that's right. You represent the property owner.

What are the status of these two roads? Are they just in plans only, or what?

Right, the Messer Street plan shows both of these as collector streets in the future. Right now, they're obviously not functioning that way. On the east side is Kelly Road, which is actually being cut off by the 612 bypass. It will become a cul-de-sac. ON THE NORTH SIDE. I DO THINK ROBIN'S GOES UNDERNEATH AND THERE'S A BRIDGE, RIGHT? OKAY. SO THAT ONE WILL PROBABLY BE MORE OF A COLLECTOR STREET IN THE FUTURE, BUT THERE REALLY HASN'T BEEN ANY DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE QUITE.

SURE. AND NOBODY'S DONE

If there are no other comments, this is a motion to forward to council with recommendation of denial or approval.

I motion to recommend to council that we approve this waiver request.

Second.

Passes eight to one.

staff is gonna prepare a resolution that's gonna go to city council next Tuesday. You're not required to attend, but encouraged to in case they have questions.

Thank you all. Up next is W26-23, Colby Dean Drake, presented by Colby Dean Drake.

Excuse me. I'm Colby Drake. requesting to waiver the sidewalk uh because there's no there's an eight foot bank and then a four foot ditch and that road's just a little narrow uh what you what y'all call it uh yeah like uh

Did you state your name and address just so we have it? 8788.

I stated my name. Colby Drake, 8788 West Gibbs Road.

And then FYI, we recently heard a conditional use for this one, which then got passed in council to have a mobile structure, a modular home on the site. And an A1 is the only zone in which it is allowed. And so this would be treated just like a sidewalk waiver for a single family home.

Yes, ma'am.

They do have some quite significant grading challenges on this piece of property. I do think that this street will be better served by sidewalk when we can get in there and do some major improvements. We do have a subdivision, couple properties to the east that is doing sidewalk along Gibbs. But that's all we have in the area.

Would you be willing to dedicate right away there to give us land to make you a sidewalk there? Wouldn't it make sense to do that? In the future, I mean, we could bring it.

We may have when their family did whenever you're. I can't remember. When we did a family lot split a couple years ago. We may have.

I don't know that part.

I bet we did because this is just a local road. It wouldn't have been a significant dedication. We probably had most, if not all of it already.

in that transaction. I don't know.

I'm not here to answer any questions. Any other comments? If not, this one's also a motion to forward to council with recommendation of denial or approval of the waiver. Motion to forward to city council to approve.

Second.

Passes 9-0.

Okay. Staff is going to prepare a resolution that has to go back to City Council, but it's going to be next Tuesday on the 9th, okay?

All right. Thank you. Up next is PP25-10, Butterfield Meadows, presented by Kraft and Toll.

Hunter Collins with Kraft and Toll, here to answer any questions. What are you here for? It's just for the extension of the preliminary plot. Any staff comment?

When are you going to get started?

So we're actually improving the drainage over there on Howard Anderson, and the property owner is also developing Whispering Springs up there. So we're improving that area first, making sure the detention works, and so we're waiting to mobilize this site, and that's pretty much the reason why. I do want to... Probably at the beginning of next year, once we get everything approved.

I do want to chat with you about that pond, just because I got a complaint recently that it's been overtopping in some storms, and we might just need to look at getting Gene to pump it down.

But we can talk about that another time. Okay. I'll give you a call tomorrow, actually, because we need to talk about the whole thing.

Any public comment? I will comment that The subdivision to the northeast did have to develop first before this could develop, and that's why they're kind of put behind. They didn't have any water.

Anything from the commission? It's a call for the vote. Call for the vote. Passes 9-0.

Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is Mary Lee Phillips, presented by Matt Waite.

I'm Matt Waite. It's just a nonconformity, just a small remodel. I don't think they were even aware that it was commercial. So if you all have any questions on what we're doing, but I guess it was a zoning thing.

It was. So the majority of this residence, so the property is split zoned. It's A1 and C2, but the residence lies on the C2 part. And so, therefore, it's a nonconforming use. And so the expansion is then capped at the 30%. And so this one was under it. It met it. It tells us everything we need to know. They look like great plans.

Mary Lee wanted more room.

Is this a house or a commercial building?

House.

So it's a house on a C2.

Yeah, the house has been there. I don't know the history of it. Somehow it changed at some point.