OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Bentonville, Arkansas/Planning Commission
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Bentonville Planning Commission Meeting Summary - March 17, 2026

Planning Commission — Tuesday, March 17, 2026
BodyBentonville, Arkansas
SessionPlanning Commission
DateTuesday, March 17, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:54:47

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.

Unassigned speaker

1:09

All

Speaker 1

1:09

right, good afternoon.

1:10

It uh 430.

1:12

So I'm gonna go ahead and call to order the meeting of the Bentville Planning Commission tech review uh for March the 17th.

1:19

I want to welcome everyone uh to the meeting this evening.

1:23

Um first thing I'll do is I'll just ask if there are any modifications or changes to the meeting minutes of the March third minutes.

1:34

Okay.

1:36

Any items on the consent agenda that a commissioner would like to have removed to the regular agenda.

Unassigned speaker

1:44

Okay,

Speaker 1

1:45

see that one.

1:46

So let's go ahead and move to the new business.

1:48

The first item on the agenda is the waiver for the seven brew coffee landscape.

1:53

Um so Mr.

1:54

Eggle.

Speaker 2

1:56

So the waiver actually got modified on the dais tonight.

2:00

We've got the uh modified waiver request.

2:02

They're only seeking a waiver from the trees, not the parking lot landscape.

2:07

Sharpen their pencil and realize they had enough landscape.

2:11

Uh so this uh an existing coffee shop going to a seven brew, uh two drive-through lanes, uh seeking a waiver for the southerly and the westerly trees.

2:25

They're uh they're about four shy, and they're giving seven new trees throughout the site.

Speaker 1

2:31

This is the new plan that's up now.

Unassigned speaker

2:40

So

Speaker 1

2:41

any questions on that waiver?

Speaker 3

2:44

No.

Unassigned speaker

2:45

So

Speaker 3

2:45

they were they were four shy.

2:48

And those four were in difficult to place areas.

Speaker 2

2:51

Right.

2:52

The southerly boundary has a retaining wall and the westerly boundary is got a drive lane and parking.

2:58

There's just not enough room to put there between building.

3:01

Okay.

Speaker 1

3:02

And this is an existing building that they're modifying for

Speaker 4

3:06

there's there's no room on the back side.

3:08

And it's this building.

Speaker 3

3:13

Y'all okay with putting this one on consent?

Speaker 1

3:16

I am okay.

3:18

Any objections to moving this item to consent?

3:20

Okay, we'll move it to consent.

3:23

All right, so under advertised public hearings, we have um it looks like nine public hearings this evening.

3:31

So any technical questions with regards to any of these items

Speaker 5

3:41

the uh momentary uh event center.

Unassigned speaker

3:46

I

Speaker 5

3:46

was still wanting to get a clarification for something similar to that earlier.

3:51

We had a screened question come up, and this has kind of same geometry as the U-Hall project we had out there with the truck dock.

4:00

I know there's space in between

Unassigned speaker

4:01

there.

Speaker 5

4:02

Uh

Unassigned speaker

4:03

well,

Speaker 5

4:04

could y'all kind of walk me through that?

4:06

What was logic that that's kind of acceptable?

4:10

I thought the U-Haul is exactly too.

4:12

I accept this as well.

4:14

But I just wondered, is it because there's a lot or some land in front of there that has proposed building?

4:20

That that truck dock on the back of that is okay, even though the other one wasn't.

Unassigned speaker

4:26

I

Speaker 5

4:26

just very visible to the very artery of the artery of eighth street.

4:31

So we'll just kind of

Speaker 2

4:33

uh the visibility issues with that truck dock are going to be managed at large scale is uh what we told the applicant.

4:40

I don't know if the applicant is here and wants to speak to some of those issues, but uh what they what they proposed was a gate.

Speaker 1

4:48

So so let's do this because this is this is technical leading into actually discussion of the project itself.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████51%
Procedural████████████14%
Engineering And Infrastructure███████████12%
Transportation Safety█████6%
Community Engagement████4%
Public Engagement████4%
Drainage Infrastructure███3%
Affordable Housing██2%
Arts And Culture██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Bentonville Planning Commission Meeting Summary - March 17, 2026

The Bentonville Planning Commission convened for a Tech Review at 4:30 PM and a formal meeting at 5:00 PM on March 17, 2026. The commission addressed a packed agenda including rezonings, a major development agreement, the adoption of the new Bentonville Community Code and Zoning Map, and several public hearings. Key outcomes included the approval of a ~$3 million fee-in-lieu development agreement for the Central and Battlefield project, the adoption of the city's new land development code, and the tabling of a rezoning request and the Downtown Neighborhood Overlay District Map for further refinement.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved the March 3rd meeting minutes.
  • Approved the Walmart Campus Subdivision Phase 15 and 16 final plats.
  • Approved the Lot 13, Block 4 of Deming's Addition lot split.
  • The 7Brew Coffee Landscape Waiver (WAV26-0003) was modified by the applicant to only seek a waiver from perimeter tree requirements (southerly and westerly boundaries), not parking lot landscaping. The commission approved moving the item to the consent agenda, where it was approved unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Vetti Group Realty Rezoning (RZ26-0007): Several residents spoke in opposition.
    • Mark Smith and Kathleen Abbott (Shell/Rainbow Farm area) cited dangerous traffic conditions, narrow roads, lack of sidewalks, and a history of accidents.
    • Stephanie Peters, Ben Hunter, and other residents from Snyder Meadows and Harbison Street expressed concerns about incompatibility with the existing R1 single-family character, potential decreases in property values, increased crime rates, drainage issues, and a lack of specific development plans or traffic studies from the applicant.
  • JPKS Enterprises Rezoning (RZ26-0002): Tim Johnson (1708 Beverly Court) voiced opposition, citing traffic congestion on Moberly Lane, concerns over the potential for a 5-6 story building dominating the area, and the poor condition of the cleared but undeveloped site.
  • Downtown Neighborhood Overlay District Map: A resident of SE 3rd Street opposed the overlay for his street, specifically fearing that new setback requirements would negatively impact the buildability and value of his property. While acknowledging the commission's recent amendment setting a 20-foot maximum setback, he expressed that the language remained confusing and the overlay unnecessary for his block.

Discussion Items

  • Central and Battlefield Development Agreement: The commission held extensive discussion during tech review. The applicant's team (Bill, Chris Pacoon) detailed three years of negotiations with the city resulting in a fee-in-lieu agreement. The developer will pay $2,997,300.98 to the city instead of directly constructing the east and west roundabouts, medians, and half-street improvements. This arrangement provides flexibility should the planned hospital development to the east require a different intersection solution in the future. Staff confirmed the city is in full agreement with the terms. The commission agreed to move this item to immediately follow the consent agenda for a standalone vote.
  • Vetti Group Realty Rezoning: Staff confirmed the R2 (Medium Density Two Family and Townhome) request aligns with the future land use map (Suburban Neighborhood) and the new T3.2 zone. Commissioners debated the need for housing diversity and density against neighborhood opposition. Commissioner Beckway stated there is no data linking housing type to crime and emphasized the city's need to provide housing for all income levels, expressing a "pro-density" stance. The commission noted that specific traffic and drainage solutions will be evaluated during the large-scale development review.
  • Crystal Bridges PUD Amendment: The amendment allows for a 2,500-seat music venue and future mixed-use development south of the Momentary. Commissioners discussed parking capacity within the existing deck and promoted bikeable/walkable access. Commissioner Bennett praised the architectural materials (corten steel) and massing.
  • JPKS Enterprises Rezoning: Commissioners were initially uncertain whether a vote for C3 would constitute a vote for T5.2 (96 feet) under the new zoning map. Staff clarified that a rezoning approval tonight would automatically convert the property to the higher-intensity T5.2 upon the map's adoption later that evening. The applicant requested a tabling to consult with his client about accepting T5.1 (60 feet) instead. The commission tabled the item (motion by Wright, second by Beckway).
  • Bentonville Community Code and Zoning Map Adoption: The commission formally adopted both the new code and zoning map. Commissioner Davis noted the helpfulness of the staff's summary of changes. The vote was unanimous (7-0).
  • Downtown Center and Neighborhood Overlay Maps: The Downtown Center Overlay Map was approved (7-0). However, the Downtown Neighborhood Overlay Map sparked debate over the setback language. The ordinance stated front and side street setbacks must "match or fall between the setbacks of existing buildings... the minimum setback shall not be greater than 20 feet." Commissioners found the phrasing confusing (e.g., does "minimum shall not be greater" mean 20 feet is a maximum or a minimum?). To ensure plain language, the commission voted to table this overlay map.

Key Outcomes

  • Approved: Consent Agenda (Plats, Lot Split, 7Brew Waiver). Vote: 7-0.
  • Approved: Central and Battlefield Development Agreement. The developer will pay $2,997,300.98 as a fee-in-lieu of constructing specific roundabouts and street improvements. Vote: 7-0.
  • Approved: Vetti Group Realty Rezoning (RZ26-0007). Rezoned from A-1/RE to R-2. Vote: 7-0.
  • Approved: Crystal Bridges PUD Amendment (PUD26-0001). Allowed for the construction of a 2,500-seat music venue and parking. Vote: 7-0.
  • Tabled: JPKS Enterprises Rezoning (RZ26-0002). Tabled to allow the applicant to decide between pursuing T5.1 or T5.2 equivalents under the new code.
  • Approved: Joe Conway / Busbam LLC Rezonings (RZ26-0004 & RZ26-0005). Two properties rezoned from R-1 to DN-2. Votes: 7-0.
  • Approved: Bentonville Community Code. Adopted the new unified land development code. Vote: 7-0.
  • Approved: Bentonville Zoning Map. Adopted the new zoning map. Vote: 7-0.
  • Approved: Downtown Center Overlay District Map. Vote: 7-0.
  • Tabled: Downtown Neighborhood Overlay District Map. Tabled for language clarification regarding setback standards.

Meeting Transcript

All right, good afternoon. It uh 430. So I'm gonna go ahead and call to order the meeting of the Bentville Planning Commission tech review uh for March the 17th. I want to welcome everyone uh to the meeting this evening. Um first thing I'll do is I'll just ask if there are any modifications or changes to the meeting minutes of the March third minutes. Okay. Any items on the consent agenda that a commissioner would like to have removed to the regular agenda. Okay, see that one. So let's go ahead and move to the new business. The first item on the agenda is the waiver for the seven brew coffee landscape. Um so Mr. Eggle. So the waiver actually got modified on the dais tonight. We've got the uh modified waiver request. They're only seeking a waiver from the trees, not the parking lot landscape. Sharpen their pencil and realize they had enough landscape. Uh so this uh an existing coffee shop going to a seven brew, uh two drive-through lanes, uh seeking a waiver for the southerly and the westerly trees. They're uh they're about four shy, and they're giving seven new trees throughout the site. This is the new plan that's up now. So any questions on that waiver? No. So they were they were four shy. And those four were in difficult to place areas. Right. The southerly boundary has a retaining wall and the westerly boundary is got a drive lane and parking. There's just not enough room to put there between building. Okay. And this is an existing building that they're modifying for there's there's no room on the back side. And it's this building. Y'all okay with putting this one on consent? I am okay. Any objections to moving this item to consent? Okay, we'll move it to consent. All right, so under advertised public hearings, we have um it looks like nine public hearings this evening. So any technical questions with regards to any of these items the uh momentary uh event center. I was still wanting to get a clarification for something similar to that earlier. We had a screened question come up, and this has kind of same geometry as the U-Hall project we had out there with the truck dock. I know there's space in between there. Uh well, could y'all kind of walk me through that? What was logic that that's kind of acceptable?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com