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 Tech Review and Regular Meeting Summary, June 16, 2026

Planning Commission — Tuesday, June 16, 2026
BodyBentonville, Arkansas
SessionPlanning Commission
DateTuesday, June 16, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 41:36

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

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:33

I'm going to go ahead and call the tech review meeting to order.

0:37

First item on the agenda is the minutes.

0:40

Any changes or modification to the meeting minutes from the June 2nd meeting.

0:48

Okay.

0:49

Seeing none, we'll move on to the consent agenda.

0:53

Three items on the consent agenda.

0:55

Are there any items on the consent that a commissioner would like to have removed from consent?

1:02

Any item that you would like to discuss during tech review.

1:06

Okay.

Unassigned speaker

1:07

And

Speaker 2

1:08

I note on item number one.

1:09

We had a offered a condition for demoing a structure.

Unassigned speaker

1:14

They

Speaker 2

1:15

have two structures, and once you consolidate the lot, you can only have one structure.

Speaker 1

1:19

Okay.

1:20

I did notice that, but let's make sure we note that when you announce it at the meeting, okay.

1:27

All right.

1:27

And then under new business, we have two public hearings.

1:32

Um, so are there any technical questions with regards to those items?

1:38

If not, we'll put off comments and discussion until regular meeting.

1:44

All righty.

1:50

Other business.

Unassigned speaker

1:51

You

Speaker 1

1:52

want to talk about that now, Tyler?

1:54

Or

Speaker 3

1:54

we can talk about it real quick.

1:55

It's just more of a FYI of what we're working on.

1:59

So it's within y'all's bylaws, and as we discussed during the the adoption process of plan Bentville, we have a uh an annual study we're gonna be doing of the future land use map, making sure we're on target, that we're

Unassigned speaker

2:14

not um

Speaker 3

2:15

that and that we're reflective of like development realities on the ground.

2:19

So we have put together a list of all the requests that we've received and some staff identified and have put that out to other city departments for their review.

2:30

Their review comments are due tomorrow, and then we have a wrap-up uh meeting with them on Friday.

2:36

So we're gonna be targeting if there are any needed amendments, uh bringing those through in July.

2:43

So just a heads up, and then we also as another aside.

2:48

Uh we're what two months into the community code now, but we had an initial sit-down earlier this week, or I guess yesterday to discuss based on what we're already hearing from applicants or from what we ourselves are seeing.

3:03

Um, you know, what kind of amendments may or may not be needed because we don't want those to fester or like sit on the vine.

3:11

Like if we know we need something, we need to bring them through.

Unassigned speaker

3:17

All

Speaker 1

3:18

right, all sounds

Unassigned speaker

3:19

good.

Unassigned speaker

3:20

So

Speaker 1

3:20

any other items that need to be discussed.

Unassigned speaker

3:23

All

Speaker 1

3:24

right, for those of you in the audience that may be here for a public hearing.

3:27

Uh, this is the technical review, so we don't talk about really public hearing items here.

3:32

We wait until the regular meeting, and then you'll have an opportunity to speak uh at that regular meeting.

3:37

It starts at five o'clock.

3:38

So I'm getting ready to adjourn the tech review meeting, but please hang around and we'll we'll uh start our regular meeting at five.

3:44

Okay.

3:46

Anything else?

Unassigned speaker

3:47

All

Speaker 2

3:47

right.

Speaker 4

3:51

Yeah, welcome, Jacob.

3:54

Where did you come from?

Speaker 5

4:00

It matters.

4:01

Yes.

Speaker 4

4:05

Welcome.

Speaker 3

4:06

That's

Speaker 6

4:06

closer.

Speaker 3

4:07

That discussion is very important.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████64%
Transportation Safety█████████████19%
Procedural██████████14%
Affordable Housing██3%
Summary of Proceedings

Bentonville Planning Commission Meeting Summary

The Planning Commission of Bentonville, Arkansas, held a Tech Review at 4:30 PM and a Regular Meeting at 5:00 PM on June 16, 2026. The commission approved meeting minutes, a three-item consent agenda, and two rezoning requests. The primary point of debate was the Srunn Rezoning (RZ26-0027), which was approved on a 5-1 vote.

Consent Calendar

  • Meeting Minutes: Minutes from the June 2, 2026 meeting were approved unanimously.
  • PLA26-0013: Property line adjustment for Lot 58, Dickson's Addition. Approved with a condition to demolish one structure before recordation.
  • PLA26-0007: Property line adjustment for Lot 1, BHCC Subdivision.
  • PLA26-0012: Property line adjustment for Lots 4A and 1A, Walnut Valley Subdivision.
  • Vote: All consent items approved 6-0.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Fish Rezoning (RZ26-0026): No members of the public spoke for or against the request to rezone 503 SW Third Street from R-1 to T4.1.
  • Srunn Rezoning (RZ26-0027): Several residents spoke on the request to rezone 5036 SW Shell Road from R-1 to T3.2.
    • First Speaker (Opposition): Argued the T3.2 zoning (allowing duplexes) intrudes into an established single-family neighborhood and raised concerns about traffic on Shell Road and safety at the intersection with Southwest Regional Airport Boulevard.
    • Stilling Garbour (Resident): Stated they were not opposed to higher density but requested infrastructure improvements, specifically bike paths, and asked for assurances regarding water and sewer capacity.
    • David Minor (Adjacent Property Owner): Opposed the project and asked the commission to require a fire-rated safety wall and evergreen trees on his property line to protect his privacy and safety from a future dead-end street.
    • Project Representative: Defended the request, stating the project fits the city's code for infill housing on a major road and would add approximately 18 units.
    • Another Resident (Concerns): Repeated concerns about water and sewer infrastructure and strongly highlighted the danger of the Shell Road and Southwest Regional Airport intersection, asking about plans for a controlled intersection.

Discussion Items

  • Srunn Rezoning (RZ26-0027) Deliberation: Planning staff recommended approval, noting the site's location on a major road and its potential as a transition zone under Enhanced Review. Staff clarified the street layout from an expired 2024 plat was not the current proposal. Staff suggested T3.1 (standard single-family) as an alternative if commissioners had reservations.
    • Commissioner discussion focused heavily on the safety of the Shell Road/Southwest Regional Airport intersection. Commissioner Davis cited this intersection as their primary reason for opposing the rezoning, stating higher density should not be added until a solution is found. Other commissioners supported the project, citing the city's need for diverse housing types and the site's position at the edge of subdivisions. A traffic study was noted as a likely requirement during the subsequent development review process.
  • Other Business: Staff provided an informational update on the annual Future Land Use Map study, aiming to bring potential amendments before the commission in July. Initial discussions on Community Code amendments were also mentioned.

Key Outcomes

  • Meeting Minutes: Approved (Unanimous).
  • Consent Agenda: Approved (6-0).
  • Fish Rezoning (RZ26-0026): Approved (6-0).
  • Srunn Rezoning (RZ26-0027): Approved (5-1). Commissioner Davis was the sole dissenting vote.
  • Future Land Use Map: Staff will continue the annual review and bring potential amendments to the commission in July.

Meeting Transcript

I'm going to go ahead and call the tech review meeting to order. First item on the agenda is the minutes. Any changes or modification to the meeting minutes from the June 2nd meeting. Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on to the consent agenda. Three items on the consent agenda. Are there any items on the consent that a commissioner would like to have removed from consent? Any item that you would like to discuss during tech review. Okay. And I note on item number one. We had a offered a condition for demoing a structure. They have two structures, and once you consolidate the lot, you can only have one structure. Okay. I did notice that, but let's make sure we note that when you announce it at the meeting, okay. All right. And then under new business, we have two public hearings. Um, so are there any technical questions with regards to those items? If not, we'll put off comments and discussion until regular meeting. All righty. Other business. You want to talk about that now, Tyler? Or we can talk about it real quick. It's just more of a FYI of what we're working on. So it's within y'all's bylaws, and as we discussed during the the adoption process of plan Bentville, we have a uh an annual study we're gonna be doing of the future land use map, making sure we're on target, that we're not um that and that we're reflective of like development realities on the ground. So we have put together a list of all the requests that we've received and some staff identified and have put that out to other city departments for their review. Their review comments are due tomorrow, and then we have a wrap-up uh meeting with them on Friday. So we're gonna be targeting if there are any needed amendments, uh bringing those through in July. So just a heads up, and then we also as another aside. Uh we're what two months into the community code now, but we had an initial sit-down earlier this week, or I guess yesterday to discuss based on what we're already hearing from applicants or from what we ourselves are seeing. Um, you know, what kind of amendments may or may not be needed because we don't want those to fester or like sit on the vine. Like if we know we need something, we need to bring them through. All right, all sounds good. So any other items that need to be discussed. All right, for those of you in the audience that may be here for a public hearing. Uh, this is the technical review, so we don't talk about really public hearing items here. We wait until the regular meeting, and then you'll have an opportunity to speak uh at that regular meeting. It starts at five o'clock. So I'm getting ready to adjourn the tech review meeting, but please hang around and we'll we'll uh start our regular meeting at five. Okay. Anything else?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com