All right, uh good evening, and I'd like to welcome everyone this evening to the October 13 2025 Planning Commission, City Planning Commission at 14 14.

I'd ask everybody to please rise and say the Pledge of Allegiance.

And to the Republic for which it stands under God.

All right, I'll ask the uh secretary to take the roll, please.

Rhett Taylor.

Vicky Newton.

Present.

Zach Ledford.

Rod Coleman.

Here.

Kelly Wilson here.

Griffin Hannah.

Here.

David Tyler.

Matt Marshall.

Sean McCaffrey.

Here.

We have eight commissioners present.

All right.

If the commissioners have had an opportunity to review the minutes from our September 9th meeting, I'd ask for a motion.

Motion to approve.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Alright, I'll ask staff comments and procedures, please.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

First, I'd like to remind you to silence your cell phones.

And welcome to the October 14th, 2025 Planning Commission meeting.

The planning commission is comprised of a group of volunteers appointed by the mayor who offer diverse expertise and perspectives guiding development and growth within Fort Smith.

This evening, the planning commission will be reviewing the following items conditional use requests, development plans, rezonings, master land use plan amendments, and home occupation requests.

The planning commission's actions this evening on conditional use requests, development plans, and home occupation requests will require the majority vote of those members that are present at this meeting and voting and will be final unless an interested party appeals the decision to the planning commission to the city board of directors.

Appeals will be presented to the city board directors for the review at a future study session here within the Blue Line Building downtown.

Master land use plan amendments and rezonings if receiving approval of the planning commission with the required five minimum yes votes will also be presented to the City of Fort Smith Board of Directors for their review on November 4th, 2025 meeting at 6 p.m.

The Board of Zoning Adjustment, which consists of the same Planning Commission members will also be reviewing variance requests this evening.

The action of the Board of Zoning Adjustment will be final unless appealed to a court having jurisdiction.

All right, thank you very much, Tyler.

We have two items a preliminary platinum heels and a final plat at Piana Hills.

And I'll ask the city to briefly present those.

Do we we don't we don't present unless y'all have a question?

Any questions or comments?

We've seen these before on Piana Hills up on the screen here briefly.

All right.

No comments.

All right.

I will ask for uh any comments from anyone out in the audience.

All right.

All right, I'll ask for a motion for the consent agenda.

So moved.

All right, I will call for a vote.

Sean McCaffrey.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Rhett Taylor.

Four.

Kelly Wilson.

Four.

Rod Coleman?

Four.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicki Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

David Tyler.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

All right, very good.

We'll move on to item two, a home occupation at 1200 South 41st Circle and ask the city to present.

Hi Commissioners, good to see you.

This first item is home occupation number three, 1025.

And it's applied for by Dina Brandenburg, the owner.

The application is for a home-based massage therapy business at 1200 South 41st Circle.

This is a duplex structure on uh just under a half of an acre that is located on South 41st Street, roughly two blocks north of Rogers, about a block and a half west of Albert Pike.

The uh zoning district is RSD2.

Uh and as I stated, the existing structure is a duplex unit.

Um the owner has stated that they are going to uh not have more than one uh client on the premises at a given time, and as stated in the application uh between uh roughly five and ten clients in the course of a week.

And as stated in the application between roughly five and ten clients in the course of a week.

All right.

Thank you, Tim.

Are there those here in favor of this application?

Miss Brandenburg, are you here?

All right.

Anyone here opposed to this application?

Please raise your hand.

All right.

All right.

I'd ask for a uh motion to uh get this on the floor, please.

Second.

Any discussions or comments from the commissioners?

Good discussion in the study session.

I'm fine with it.

Anatomy issues.

Any other comments?

Not all as for a uh vote on item two.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Rod Coleman.

Four.

Matt Marshall.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hanna.

Four.

David Tyler.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Eight in favor.

Opposed.

All right.

Thank you.

That passes.

Our next items are three, four, and five, a master land use plan amendment, a rezoning and development plan on Wheeler Avenue.

Thank you, Chairman.

Item three is a master land use plan amendment 161025 by Brett Abbott, agent for Basiliki Investments LLC for Master Land Use Plan Amendment from Institutional to General Commercial in a proposed C5 zone at 5724 Wheeler Avenue.

The subject property is on the west side of Wheeler Avenue, north of Zero Street.

The tract contains an area of 0.64 acres with approximately 154 feet of street frontage along Wheeler Avenue.

The property is currently zoned RM3, a companion zoning application request C5 zoning district.

The Master Street Plan classifies Wheeler Avenue as major arterial.

The applicant is requesting an amendment to the master land use plan to accommodate the requested C5 zoning district.

The C5 zoning district has been requested to allow for the existing church building to be utilized as an event center.

The requested general commercial classification is an appropriate classification for the C5 zoning district and surrounding development.

Staff recommends approval.

Item 4 is a rezoning 291025, a request by Brett Abbott, agent for Vasiliki Investments.

For Planning Commission for a zone request from RM3 to C5 by extension.

Approval of the request will allow for the existing 1,800 square foot church sanctuary to operate as an event center.

The surrounding zoning and land use are as follows.

To the north, we have single family residence, and it's an RM3 zone.

To the west is a single family in a C5 zone.

To the east is an electrical equipment appliance and components manufacturing business in an I-1 zone, and to the south is an HVAC office in a C5 zone.

A conditional use application for an 1800 square foot church assessor accessory building fellowship hall was approved on April 11th, 2017 by the Planning Commission.

A companion variance request from the required six feet opaque fence or a landscaping buffer adjacent to the residential properties was also approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment at the same time at the same meeting, uh subject to the submitted approved development plan.

Approval of the rezoning will allow the event center to operate from the existing 1800 square foot church sanctuary.

This is this request is accompanied by the a companion master land use plan amendment application to general commercial and a development plan request for an event center.

Staff recommends approvals subject to the approval of the companion master land use plan amendment and development plan applications.

Item five is a development plan 1910 25 for planning command planning commission uh consideration for an event center in a proposed C5 zone approval of the development plan will facilitate the rezoning request and allow the operation of the event center from the existing 1800 square foot church.

The site design features are as follows.

No new driveways are proposed.

The development will utilize the one existing driveway located on zero uh on Wheeler Avenue.

There's an existing sidewalk along Wheeler Avenue, um, and the previously required perimeter to landscaping complies with the UDO.

The plan includes dumpster and trash receptacle screening in compliance with the UDO.

A new six six feet opaque privacy fence has been proposed along the north boundary of the property adjacent to the existing single family residence, and an existing natural landscape buffer exists along the western property line.

Staff is requesting installation of a six feet opaque privacy fence along the entire northern boundary and a portion of the southwestern boundary adjacent to the single family residence.

The site currently has 18 parking spaces and complies with the eight with the UDO.

A neighborhood meeting was held on October 1st, 2025 at 6 p.m.

at the Fort Smith Main Library, and no neighboring property owners attended, and that meeting was for all three items.

The planning commission approved a conditional use request for an 1800 square foot church accessory building or fellowship hall on April 11th 2017, and the Board of Zoning Adjustment also approved that variance request for the six foot feet opaque privacy fence.

Upon review of the uh request, staff discovered that the property was recently sold on September 23rd, 2025, and a new non-compliant landlocked parcel, parcel 1883 000, 018270 was created during the filing of that deed, and staff is requesting a replat for both parcels to resolve the issue.

Staff recommends approval subject to the following construction must comply with the submitted development plan.

Changes and amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted, but limited to those described in section 273307 of the UDO.

Any changes greater to those described in this section will require planning commission approval.

Parcels 18883 000 018270 and 16932 0003 000 00 Lot 3 must be replatted uh into one continuous lot in compliance with C5 bulk and area requirements.

A six feet opaque privacy fence shall be installed along the entire northern boundary and southwest property lines adjacent to the residentially zoned and developed properties, and no outdoor storage shall be permitted.

Thank you.

Thank you, Victoria.

Uh are there those here in favor of the application?

I see Mr.

Abbott is here, I believe.

Uh anyone here in opposition to this application, please raise your hand.

All right.

All right.

Um I'll ask for a motion then to get the master land use plan amendment item number three on the floor, please.

I'll make a motion to approve the staff comments.

Second.

All right.

Any comments or questions from the commissioners?

Good question on the uh the perimeter six-foot opaque screen fence.

So it's on the northern side of the property.

It looks like it goes on the grass strip too.

Uh this might be getting in the weeds, but uh where exactly will the fence go because I notice a curb along the boundary of where the parking lot is.

Is the fencing gonna go on the outside of that curb inside?

It'll have to go uh it'll have to be on their property line, so where their actual true property line is, and it it could go on top of the curve if if they own you know that top part of the curve, which I assume they do since it's part of the parking lot, or they could put it on the inside of the curve.

They have enough room through there, and it's actually designated as one way, even though that older plan doesn't show it good.

So you know that's only 12 foot wide.

So if they had to, they could put it on the inside of the curve.

I would assume they would want to put it on top.

I'd assume too.

I just yeah, I didn't know how they would plan that.

Okay.

Any other comments or questions?

This seems to kind of be the trend for these churches, which I think is a good use for these spaces.

Um that I'll ask for a motion on item uh excuse me, a vote on item number three.

Kelly Wilson for Rod Coleman.

Matt Marshall, Vicky Newton, four griffin Hannah.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

Uh item number four, the rezoning.

Any additional comments, questions?

Not all asked for a motion then for make a motion to approve the staff comments.

Second.

I'll ask for a vote.

Rod Coleman.

Four.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Dickie Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Kelly Wilson.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

And lastly, the development plan.

I'll ask for a motion.

Get that on the floor.

Make a motion to approve the staff comments.

I'll second.

Any comments?

All right.

I'll ask for a vote then on item number five, please.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Kelly Wilson.

Four.

Rod Coleman.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

All those passed.

I'll now recess the planning commission and convene the board of zoning adjustment.

We actually have two items of variance and a conditional use on Grand Avenue.

Thank you, Chairman.

Variants 30 1025 is a request by Brett Abbott, agent for Dustin and Anna Booth for Board of Zoning Adjustment consideration of a zoning variance request from the required passing aisle for a drive-thru at 4322, 4324, 4326, and 4328 Grand Avenue.

Approval of the variants will facilitate the construct construction of a 4,000 square foot shopping center containing a 2,700 square foot restaurant with a drive-thru services without the required passing lane and a 1,300 square foot insurance office.

The subject property is on the south side of Grand Avenue and west of North 44th Street.

The tract contains an area of 0.39 acres with approximately 130 feet of street frontage along Grand Avenue and 140 feet of street frontage along North 44th.

The existing zoning on this tract is commercial light, C2.

The Master Street Plan classifies Grand Avenue as a major arterial and North 44th Street as a local road.

The applicant did not provide a hardship but states that the lot is not large of it is not large enough for the development.

Approval of the conditional use will facilitate the construction of a 4,000 square foot shopping center containing a 2,000 square 2,700 square foot restaurant with a drive-through and a 1,300 square foot insurance office.

The surrounding zoning uh and land use are as followed.

To the north is single family residence, doctor's office, and restaurant with drive-through services and an RM3 uh transitional special and C2 zone.

The south the the south and west are single family residences in an RM3 zone, and to the east is a salon and a C2 zone.

Some of the design the the design site design features include um the development proposing four driveways, two driveways will be located off of the alley uh in connection with uh grand avenue, and two driveways will be located on North 44th Street.

Perimeter landscaping and parking lot screening is in compliance with the UDO and is proposed along Grand Avenue and North 44th Street.

Additional interior landscaping has been provided.

A six foot tall privacy fence is proposed on the south and west property line adjacent to single family residences.

Trash receptacle screening has been provided uh on the eastern and western side of the building.

The development has 19 parking spaces and complies with UDO.

The proposed facade consists of a hundred percent high quality materials, including brick veneer and ethos siding.

A neighborhood meeting was held on Wednesday, October 1st, 2025 at 5 30 at the uh Fort Smith Main Library, and no neighboring property owners attended the meeting.

On January 9th, 2024, the planning commission approved a variance from 30 feet to 24 feet side yard setback, a rezoning request from residential multifamily medium density RM3 to commercial light C2, and a development plan for request uh for a commercial shopping center subject to the submitted development plan.

The board of directors subsequently approved the rezoning at the February 6th, 2024 meeting.

The applicant is now proposing a new development that includes a coffee shop with drive-through services, omitting the required passing lane.

If staff in staff's opinion, then the new design lacking um the required passing lane is an overdevelopment of the site.

Additionally, staff believes that the new driveway locations and drive-through window infringe on the existing single-family residences located to the west and south.

Staff recommends denial of the request, however, if uh the planning commission and BZA are inclined to improve to approve the application, staff's request that it substantiate the reason for the approval and include the following conditions.

Construction must comply with the submitted development plan.

Changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted, but limited to those described in section 27307 of the UDO.

Any changes greater to those described in this section will require planning commission approval.

Platting and right-of-way dedicated dedication must be complete prior to the issuance of a building permit.

An automatic irrigation system must be installed for the required landscaping.

All site lighting must shall comply, she shall be completely shielded and comply with section 276025 of the UDO.

And should a dust dumpster be utilized in the future, um, the owners shall provide a the required um trash receptacle screening and dumpster must be accessible for a sanitation apparatus.

Thank you.

All right, thank you very much.

Are those here in favor of this application this evening?

Anyone opposed to this application?

Right.

All right, um I'll ask for a uh motion to get item six variants on the floor, please.

Motion to approve the addition of staff comments.

Second.

Right.

Any comments or questions from the commission?

My question kind of lies in the alleyways.

Are they going to develop those alleyways or uh the you know do you happen to know if they're gonna come in with concrete on those?

It kind of seems like they're accommodating the alley.

And would that be on city main to maintain, or would that be on the developer to maintain?

That's sort of a question for planning possibly.

Yes, it will be um hard service, and the city will will maintain it after they um they concrete it there.

Yeah, so it'll be the developer's expense to fix it, repair it, hard surface it, and then uh according to our uh city street department, they would maintain what's already developed, uh kind of like similar to how they maintain the existing alleys.

If it's gravel, they leave it gravel and keep the limbs trimmed back.

Um and they do plan on using it as as you can see.

There are two new driveways off that small alley off Grand Avenue.

It's only about 15 foot wide, and then the rear alley back there that's to the south, as you can see.

They're really not using that.

They're putting a privacy fence up there, and that's why they've requested the variance from a passing aisle, right?

A drive-thru has to have where people can pull out and pass you.

So will they be on the west side alley?

Will they be concreting all that as well from the from the street all the way around back of the building?

There is a current that there currently is um a driveway from Grand Avenue up into that alley.

You see that.

But it says new paving on the floor.

And then they'll do new pavement.

That means they're gonna pay this.

Yes.

Yeah.

So the alleyway you said is only 15 feet wide.

Yes.

That's correct.

Okay.

So that would be the one-way um drive-thru as well as 15 feet wide.

Okay.

Can you remind us what the purpose is of a pass like the passing lane and drive-thru?

Sure, it's used uh for both things.

One, some people, you know, may not like setting in the lines long, but also it can be used for emergency services.

Uh, this did have some conflict.

Uh the the thought process was originally when this came was that well we can have this drive-thru and then the alley can serve as the passing aisle, which doesn't meet the code's definitions.

You can you must have that passing aisle, but it must be on your property, right?

Um also uh, you know, they installed the privacy fence.

So now there's not gonna be a passing aisle.

So that could cause problems uh for emergency services is something, or if a car gets broke down, now you know, do the cars back out.

So um the emergency services did not like the idea of the you know not having that required passing out.

There's no way to come up for you.

You talk you mean Grand Avenue?

44th Street coming down 44 again and your windows up top of two, no, right in the middle of the can you come off 44, do the loop around the building and hit that.

Coffee shop street two, because it's oh yes, you're saying if we put the drive-thru window on the east side of the building.

I'll probably just give it around like that.

Yes, thank you.

Yeah, I'm just asking.

Uh we absolutely could, but then we don't have the five-car queuing, which which we have to have, right?

We'd be queuing into the street.

So the idea on this is that the drive-through lane is on our property uh with the five-car queuing.

What we don't have, as Tyler said, is the pass-through lane.

But the idea is that if I come down the one-way existing alley off of Grand on the west side, and I pass behind the building, and I take a look, and there's you know, three or four cars in the driveway, and I don't want to I don't want to wait, I can just jump into the alley and go and go about my business, right?

Um the emergency service thing makes sense, you know.

Obviously, there's gonna be a fence there, but uh as far as people having to wait and being able to get out of the line, they just wouldn't get in it to begin with.

Five cars, yes.

I mean, I I I think the development works other than the drive-through lane.

I think the drive-thru lane doesn't have it.

We've we looked across the street, the dominoes, you can see that building's beat, so are the rails.

Um I just I feel like the development's great.

Looks wonderful.

It will be good.

Minus the drive-through.

There's just not enough room.

Small question to staff.

So I know the recommendation was for denial, but if we were inclined to approve, there's a recommendation to make it to where the sanitation could get in and out.

And just based on this current plan, how it it couldn't happen based on this current plan.

So the and then that's for sanitation if they use a dumpster.

Currently, they do not plan on using dumpsters as well we've been told.

Um you can see right here they call it mechanical screening and also trash receptacle screen.

Code doesn't say you have to have a dumpster, it just says all trash receptacles must be screened.

My thought process is the insurance office may not you know generate much trash, however, the coffee shop may need an actual dumpster.

And that was a concern by staff, rather they put something here, but they would have to work with the sanitation department on how the sanitation truck would get in there and access it if they ever do install a dumpster.

You know, a coffee shop being a smaller, lighter scale restaurant, but it should produce trash where I could see for a future tenant requesting a dumpster.

That's why we made that comment.

Okay, I don't even think there's room to put a dumpster next to the building through the setbacks, so then it's just wide.

You'd have to go outside of that front.

Yeah.

It's a lot of building on a small site.

Any other comments or questions?

All right.

If not, well, I'll ask for a vote on the variance item number six.

Vicky Newton against Griffin Hannah against.

David Tyler.

Sean McCaffrey.

Against Brett Taylor?

Against.

Kelly Wilson against.

Matt Marshall.

Against.

We have two in favor and six opposed.

All right.

Uh I will reassess the board of zoning adjustment and convene the planning commission on item number seven.

As for a motion, get that on the floor.

Motion to approve of the addition of staff comments.

Second.

Any additional comments or questions from the commissioners or Mr.

Abbott?

Anybody.

All right.

Alright, I'll ask for a vote then on the conditional use item seven.

Griffin Hann?

Against.

David Tyler.

Four.

John McCaffrey.

Against.

Brett Taylor.

Against.

Kelly Wilson against.

Rod Coleman.

Matt Marshall.

Against.

Vicky Newton.

Against.

Two in favor, zero.

I'm sorry, two in favor, six opposed.

All right.

Those two items do not pass.

We'll move on to items number eight and nine.

The applicant has asked for those items to be tabled.

So I will ask for a motion.

Motion to table.

We need to do them one at a time.

Second.

Okay.

It would do item eight first.

Yeah, and you'll have to convene the so uh let's uh on item number eight.

Do you have a motion to table item eight to conditional use?

Yeah, red motion.

I'll second.

Right.

Um I'll ask for a vote.

David Tyler.

For tabling.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Yes.

Kelly Wilson for Rod Palman.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Four.

Eight in favor.

Zero opposed.

Right.

All right.

We assess the planning commission and convene the board of zoning adjustment and ask for a motion for tabling item number nine of variants.

Motion to table.

Item number nine.

Say.

All right.

I ask for a uh vote on item number nine to table.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Ellie Wilson.

Four.

Rod Coleman.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero of all right.

We'll now move to item number ten, a variance at Utica Place.

Thank you.

Uh variants 2910 25, a request by J.R.

McFayt, owner for the various requests from 25 feet to 20 feet from uh front yard setback in residential multimedium density RM3 zone at 1924 Utica Place.

Approval of the variants will allow the previously constructed 10 by 20 wood framed metal roof carport to remain.

The subject property is on the southwest corner of Utica Place and Jinny Lynn Road.

The uh track contains approximately 70 feet of street frontage along Utica Place and approximately 120 feet of uh frontage along Jenny Lennon Road.

Uh the applicant states that the house was existing at the time of the purchase, and due to its placement on the lot, there is insufficient uh space to add the carport without encroaching into the uh front yard setback.

There was a neighborhood meeting uh held on October 1st uh at 5 30 at the uh main library.

Uh no, uh this was on site.

Uh one neighboring property owner attended uh the meeting uh and did not have any concerns with the project.

Uh staff comment uh the building staff was contacted on June the 12th regarding construction occurring at the residence without a permit uh a at subsequent site inspection by a building inspector confirmed that the carport had been constructed without a building permit.

Uh the applicant was advised by the building department uh to obtain a permit during the review of the building permit.

It was determined that the front yard setback variants must be approved prior to the uh uh permit issuance.

Uh, should the BCA be inclined to approve this variant, staff request the board uh substantiate its reasoning.

If the BZA is inclined to approve this variant, staff recommends the following.

Uh construction must comply with the submitted development plan.

Changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are uh permitted but limited to those described in section 27307 of the UDO.

Any changes greater than those uh described in this section will require planning commission approval.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Uh assume the applicant is here this evening.

All right, very good.

Uh who want to say something, yes, sir.

Please come up and state your uh name and address for the record, please.

We are being recorded.

My name name is Mark Hardy.

I live at 423 North of D Street, the oldest house in Fort Smith.

I'm talking about this project right here.

They say I didn't have permits.

I got three.

One, they didn't even put the right people on it as a contractor.

The second one, they didn't think I need to do any infrastructure.

I'm flipping this house.

That roof did not look like that before.

That roof was a 312.

I put a 612 on it.

Gave it some curve appeal.

Make this house usable and sellable.

Here's the third one I finally got.

He says I don't have no permits.

Well, that's a lie.

I got three of them for the same address.

Look at them all.

And I I paid 250 dollars to come in here and say, give me that five foot, because people invest more in vehicles than they do in houses sometimes.

So why pulled it foot five foot back?

We can't put a vehicle in the driveway.

Thank you, Mr.

McFay.

Any comments.

Mr.

Hardy.

Oh, Hardy, I'm sorry.

Mr.

McFay.

Mr.

Hardy.

True.

So to be clear, he did have a roofing and siding permit, which does not cover the carport.

After or during those inspections of the roofing and siding, that's when it was termed, hey, you don't have a permit for this car port, which he came to apply for the permit, and that's why he's here for the variance.

So the variance is approved, he will get the permit for the carport.

So the carport was an addition that was never reviewed by any staff.

So I want to make sure that's clear, and that's why we're all here today.

Well, no, I mean I want you to understand that first permit right there it was the building permit.

There was a car port on it.

I took it down.

It was a shitty little car port.

Sir, yeah, please.

Excuse me, my friends.

Anyway, I put a better one on there.

That third permit, they made me draw it up just like I did the elevation change and submit it to the city.

They finally said, okay, but I hadn't built it.

I had to add it on before I did.

Right.

Again, I I can certainly understand your frustration and maybe and maybe there's some uh you know uh misunderstanding on somebody's part regarding the permit application process.

Okay.

I don't believe according to the city that that was exactly followed, but uh again, that's not up for the debate here at this point.

We're here to debate the you know, this this variance here on this on this application in his carport, which we've seen these type before, you know.

You have improved the property, you know, it looks a lot better.

There's there's no no dispute about that.

Your neighbors are probably happy about it.

They really are.

Um so um anyway, but let's do this.

Let's get a do we get a motion yet on the floor for this?

Why don't we get a motion on on the floor for this, please?

Motion to approve with the additional staff comments.

Second.

Right.

Is there anyone here in opposition of this application this evening?

All right.

Any additional comments from from the from the commissioners.

If we are inclined to deny this request, does he have to remove this carport that he's attached to his home?

That's correct.

If uh he does not remove it one, he would have to remove in then the subsequent building permit.

Um that's been very few in far cases between where people don't remove it, but then it it would carry on to court after a subsequent amount of time.

But yes, if it is denied, they would have to remove the carport.

We're just talking about five feet, right?

That's correct.

So part of the recommendation was that there was a submitted development plan, and if there's anything that is changed from that plan, it would have to be fixed.

That's correct.

So this med development plan was after the permits, but the uh so it shows that carport and the setback, it shows that addition, and that's where he went and uh, you know, that's part of the variance approval process.

You have to supply the certified site plan.

So, for instance, if he was to do a larger car port in the future, uh, then he would have to come back to the planning commission or something that uh an adjustment to this specific variance there in the front.

But to be clear, there's no more construction that's needed.

I mean, he's done, and he's not planning on doing more.

That that's my understanding, yes.

Okay, was the carport in the initial drawings of the initial permits, if you don't mind me asking, sir.

Was the carport in the initial drawings of the of the initial permit?

The original because I didn't have an answer from the question.

What I was gonna do for it.

All of these if you look at an aerial view of this this whole neighborhood, it's a horseshoe drive right off Jetty Lynn.

You can see this is not the only car port that's got a metal roof that's close to the road.

Matter of fact, I I I lined it up one on one down the street from us with the one that was closest to what I needed, and she was three doors down on the same side of the road.

I put it right with hers.

I was like, well, you know, that's but there's some like 10 foot from the road.

It's still there.

They're not tearing it down.

And I just don't see, you know, the sense the sense in it, you know.

I thought I think that this carport looks perfectly fine, and if it's in the neighborhood, um, I hate that the circumstances happen the way that they did.

I don't know whose fault that was, but I think I think in my opinion, it's fine.

I'm ready to vote on this.

Okay.

I appreciate you.

Any other comments or questions?

Not we'll call for a vote.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Rod Coleman.

Four.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hanna.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

We'll move on to a variance at South Y Street.

And that's item number eleven.

Thank you, Chairman.

Item number eleven is variants 281025 as a request by Sherry Goodram, owner for Board of Zoning Adjustment Consideration for a zoning variance request from 30 feet to 9 feet front yard setback.

At 5920 South Y Street.

Approval of the variants will allow the previously constructed 10 by 20 metal carport addition to remain.

The subject property is located on this on the south side of South Y and east of South 58th Street.

The track contains an area of 0.31 acres and approximately 90 feet of street frontage along South Y Street.

The existing zoning on this tract is residential single family low density RS1.

The applicant states the carport is needed to protect her children and uh vehicles from inclement weather.

Uh neighborhood meeting was held on September 24th, 2025 at 5 30.

Uh on site.

Five neighboring property owners attended the meeting.

Four neighboring property owners had no objection to the request, and one neighboring property owner was in opposition to the variance, stating that the design of the structure was out of character for the existing home and neighborhood.

On September 8th, 2025, the building services department received a complaint about a car port being constructed without a building permit.

Upon uh inspection, it was discovered that a carport was installed at the subject property.

A stop work order and correction notice were placed on the on the site upon the permit application request.

It was determined that the carport encroached the front yard setback and zoning variants must be approved prior to obtaining a building permit for the carport.

If the BZA is inclined to approve the variance, staff request it substantiate the reason for approval and includes the following conditions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I believe the applicant is here, Miss Gudrum.

All right.

Anyone here else in favor of the application?

Please raise your hand.

Anyone opposed to this application, please raise your hand.

All right.

All right.

I'm gonna ask for a um motion to get this on the floor.

And this is item number eleven variants.

Second.

All right, we had a lot of good discussion at this stage session.

Miss Goodman, will you just maybe come up and kind of explain how we got here on your situation?

Hi, thank you.

Um my children live in this home.

It's it's my parents' previous residents.

Um, and they have newer cars and wanted to protect them.

I did not understand or know that the structure needed a permit.

Um the company that I went through didn't recommend it.

Um, and they came out and installed, and then the neighbor complained, and then we're like, okay, here we are.

So I apologize for not knowing.

Um is there anything else?

No, that that's fine.

Any comments or questions from the commissioners?

Very similar to the last one.

I kind of looks very much the same as what we just approved.

I think there was the issue of this neighborhood not having any carports at all, which distinguishes it from the last application, possibly.

There are two one in a house that's built into the house, like it's underneath, it's just open air.

And then there's another one down the street that is on the side of the house, tucked underneath trees and stuff, according to Google.

Sure.

Do uh can you see them?

Can you see that mat there, Rhett?

Because I couldn't, I couldn't find them where they were busting the front yard setback.

Oh no.

They're all inside the setbacks.

It's just there are car ports on the street.

Understood.

I'm perfectly proud of this request.

There are many worse structures in this town.

So this one actually looks pretty good.

It looks like they did it.

Right.

I mean better than anything else we've seen.

Whatever.

Okay.

She the owner is not a contractor in the industry for construction.

She has no idea how this process works.

I'm going to assume that.

Sorry.

It's your contractor really.

Should have known.

Messed up.

And should have known.

And I guess they probably didn't know.

I don't think I had a contractor.

I mean, I went to a company, purchased it, and then their company came out and installed.

So I was blind.

The air is on them.

Um, but like I said, maybe it's just my mood.

There are far worse things that in Fort Smith.

So honestly, I wish we could find the contractor somehow, but I don't think that's possible.

But anyway.

Um had some avenue to do that.

Anyway, any other comments or questions?

Not call for a vote on this item number eleven.

Four.

Rod Coleman?

Four.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hanna.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

Thank you.

Thank you for consideration.

Chairman.

We're not gonna do it.

Yeah.

I don't know if we fix this.

Yeah.

I agree.

Something.

What happens?

This is just not doing.

Sure.

And this and obviously, as you know, Rob, this isn't the first one you all seen, and it probably won't be the last.

Um it's something I plan to brought up and did some research on how other cities are handling it.

Little Rock, Fayville, a few of those are kind of in the same boat we are.

Uh in this instance, I believe this one might have been a Texas contractor.

So come across the border, maybe do it on a Saturday.

And in you know, nobody's the wiser.

If they don't apply for a permit, we can't let them know, hey, you need to adjust this to meet your setbacks.

Um, and I'm not sure really what code amendment to do that because the all the different zonings, you know, they have those required setbacks, and there's no currently there's no alleviation uh for that, uh, you know, just to waive setbacks for all car ports.

Uh and you know, it some neighborhoods um HOAs and that may regulate that their cells where it could be offensive.

So yeah, those are good comments by Commissioner.

It needs to be punitive, more punitive.

It really does.

Yeah.

I believe it's just double the building permit fee, right?

But again, that's by the owner.

That's the owner.

And honestly, that's you know, you're going from $500 to a thousand dollars.

Oh good.

That's not that's not a bringing up here from but we have some actual houses.

Change them.

Thank you.

Very good.

All right.

Uh we'll move on to items number 12 and 13, a variance in a conditional use at South 73rd place.

Thank you.

Uh variants 321025, a request by Brett Abbott agent for Derek Richardson for consideration of a zoning variance request from the minimum required high quality materials and uh industrial light zone at 5615 South 73rd place.

Approval of the variance request will facilitate the construction of a 20,000 eight hundred and fifty-three square foot uh sports complex with a barbershop and two athletic fields without the required high quality materials on the north rear facade and the east side facade.

The subject property is located on the north end of the South 73rd place uh cul-de-sac, north and also north of uh uh South Zero Street.

The track contains an area of 9.96 acres with approximately 185 feet of street frontage along South 73rd place.

The applicant states that the north rear and the east side facades face the railroad tracks and have no uh public visibility.

There was a neighborhood meeting that was held on October 1st at the main branch of the Fort Smith Library, uh, and there were no neighboring property owners in attendance for staff comments.

The uh the applicant is requesting a variance from the high quality material to install 100% metal wall panels on the east and north facades that abut undevelopment properties.

The entire south and west facades will contain 100% high quality uh materials, including EFIS, Hardy Board, and Rock Wainscott.

In staff's opinion, the 100% high quality material on the facades visible from the developed properties and right-away will improve the overall aesthetics of the project while controlling expenditures by allowing metal on the facades not visible to the public.

Staff recommends approval with the following conditions.

Uh construction must comply with a submitted development plan.

Changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted, but the uh but are limit to those described in sections 27 330 uh 7 of the UDO.

Any changes greater than that uh described in this section will require planning commission approval.

Uh the south front and the west side facades must consist of 100% high quality as shown on the development plan.

Uh landscaping and parking lot screening must comply with UDO and uh site lighting shall comply with uh the UDO on item 13, which is a conditional use, conditional use uh 131025, a request by Brad Abbott, agent for Derek Richardson for planning commission consideration to develop a sports complex in athletic fields at 5615 South 73rd place.

Approval of the conditional use will allow for a 27,853 square foot sports complex with a barbershop and also with two athletic fields.

Some of the site design features for this project, uh the landscaping uh the uh plan indicates conceptual perimeter landscaping and interior landscaping.

Uh landscaping must comply with the UDO.

Uh screening the plan shows dumpster screening and ground mounted HVAC uh and mechanical screening.

Uh there are 54 uh proposed parking spaces and which does comply with the UDO.

Uh and as we stated, some of the architectural features, which uh you know the applicant is seeking a variance from what we just talked about from the uh uh from the east side and the north side uh from high quality, the south and the front uh front and the west will have a 100% high quality staff uh comments the conditional use and companion variance application will facilitate the construction of a new sports complex with the uh 1,489 square foot barbershop, a 4911 uh square foot general retail business and two athletic fields.

Staff recommends approval of the following with the following conditions.

Construction must comply with the submitted development plan.

Uh changes or amendments to the uh submitted development plan are permitted, but are limited to those described in section 2730-7 of the UDO.

Any changes greater than that described in this section will require planning commission approval.

The south front and west side facades must consist of 100% high quality materials as shown on the development plan.

Uh landscaping and parking lot screening must comply with the UDO.

Uh site lighting shall comply with the UDO, and all required landscaping must be irrigated with an automatic irrigation system.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Kalen.

Uh are there those here in favor of the application this evening?

All right, Mr.

Abbott.

All right, very good.

Anyone opposed?

All right.

I'm gonna call for a motion on item 12 of variants.

I'll make a motion to approve with staff comments.

Second.

All right, any additional comments, questions?

Applicant gave a good presentation at the study session.

I think it's good development for the city.

So UI I'll call for a vote.

Kelly Wilson, Rod Coleman.

Four Matt Marshall, Vicky Newton, four and Hannah.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Grett Taylor.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

Right.

I'll recess the board of zoning adjustment.

Convene the planning commission to consider item 13 conditional use.

I'll ask for a motion to get that on the floor.

Motion to approve with staff comments.

Second.

Any additional comments or questions?

All right.

I'll call for vote on item 13, conditional use.

Rod Coleman.

Matt Marshall.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

Griffin Hannah?

Four.

David Tyler?

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Four.

Kelly Wilson.

Four.

Eight in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

Those two items passed.

Last two items are items 14 and 15, a rezoning and a development plan on Rogers Avenue.

The last two items are rezoning number 30-10-25.

A request by Goodwin Engineering LLC agent for Goodwin Family Trust for a zone change from residential single family duplex low medium density, which is RSD2, and commercial heavy, which is C52 Commercial Light, which is C2 at 8716 Rogers Avenue.

Accompanying the rezoning application is a development plan application number two number 20-10-25.

Also a request by Goodwin Engineering Agent for Goodwin Family Trust.

And this development plan application is for approval of a shopping center with drive-through and a proposed commercial light C2 zone at 8716 Rogers Avenue.

I will start with the rezoning and kind of walk us through that and segue straight into the development plan.

But these are two separate items.

Approval of the subject rezoning and companion development plan will facilitate construction of two 8800 square foot commercial retail buildings, including one building with drive-through service.

And it is approximately 190 feet of frontage along South 87th Street.

And they also had questions about the allowable uses of the property.

Moving on to the development plan itself.

Tells us that to the north is the undeveloped land that is slightly outside of the boundary of this application.

And then across Rogers Avenue is uh American Freight Furniture Retailer.

Immediately to the east is MetaServe, home care pharmacy.

To the south is Chamberlain Mechanical combined with a single family residence that uh sits upon the currently duplex zone property south as a subject site, and then to the west is a portion of the Maraud of Fort Smith assisted living facility.

Um with regard to access to this site, there are two.

Let's go to the master plan.

Um the colored one.

There are two driveways that are uh proposed to intersect with 87th Street and the one driveway I mentioned a moment ago that would take vehicles in and out of the site onto Rogers Avenue.

Um with regard to drainage, it is worth mentioning that the uh applicant proposes underground detention vaults uh adjacent to Rogers Avenue.

The entire site drains to the north toward Rogers Avenue, and so those would be the vaults that receive uh stormwater runoff and then meter that water out at the pre-development rate.

Um additional right-of-way is proposed at uh as part of this development application, but um there will be plating required prior to issuance of a building permit, and it's not inconceivable that additional right-of-way may be uh uh deemed necessary at the time of plat review.

Uh there is screening adjacent to 87th Street that will be in conformance with the UDO.

And um because of excessive excavation that will be needed to make this site work on the south boundary.

There will be a retaining wall that ranges between four and six feet in height, and the applicant proposes to place a uh screen privacy fence atop the retaining wall.

Um architectural features worth noting is that the uh applicant is proposing to use 100% high quality materials on the north, east, and west facades consisting of stone, glass, and stucco.

Um that is in excess of the required 51% minimum.

So they're exceeding that in their proposal, and then the rear facade comply with the UDO providing 51% uh stucco and 49% metal wall materials.

Um I already mentioned the neighborhood meeting, and I will conclude that staff recommends approval of the rezoning application, and staff recommends approval of the development plan application with the following conditions.

Uh one construction must comply with the submitted development plan.

Changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted, but limited to those described in section 2730-7 of the UDO.

Any changes greater than those described in this section will require planning commission approval.

Two, the subject site must be platted prior to occupancy.

Additional right-of-way and or easements may be deemed necessary at the time of plating.

Three, sidewalks must be installed on the east side of eight of South 87th Street and along Rogers Avenue frontage with the subject phase of construction.

And then finally, all required landscaping must be irrigated with an automatic irrigation system.

That concludes my presentation, and I'm glad to answer questions if you have them.

Very good, Tim.

Thank you very much.

The applicant is here, Ms.

Goodwin.

Uh anyone here opposed or just have comments or questions for the applicants.

Please raise your hand, and you're more than welcome to come up, please, and state your name and address.

Cindy Larkin home address is 3712 Bay Side Circle.

It's concerning your comment, the building to the left.

It's MetaSave, M-E-D-I-S-A-V, not MetaServe Pharmacy.

All right.

Thank you for that clarification.

Yes, sir.

Greg Ferris, 4112 Colton Drive.

I'm the HOA president of Wellington Place.

What kind of businesses are we looking at going into those areas into those buildings?

Do we have any idea?

Comments or questions?

Come back, Mr.

Goodwin, if you don't mind.

State your name and address, please.

Jackson Goodwin 3503 Free Ferry Road.

Uh generally we'd be thinking, you know, nail salons, maybe some fast food restaurants, you know, just general kind of light business, maybe some office space, maybe Jay.

We're pretty open to just about anything that could go there.

Um I'd say pretty similar to even the strip center to the west of this that has like the wingstop or pizza hut, just similar like uses that you'd see over there.

So during construction on 87th, are they going to be accessing off 87th to do the construction and all the dirt work?

And if so, who's going to maintain keeping that cleaned off?

Because we have, I mean, that goes back to a housing addition, obviously, and you know, there's there's emergency vehicles going into that retirement place constantly.

So if you've got dirt and stuff on there and it gets wet and it's gonna be slick, we're gonna have an issue.

That'll be all on us.

We'll be doing all the construction, so we'll get all our you know, DEQ permits through the state and make sure we're maintaining uh you know, all the dirt on side and cleaning the street up and all that, sir.

It's also worth noting that there is an access to very aware of that.

And the the applicant would be required to have construction and stormwater permanent plan and that sort of thing to maintain and records as well.

Fine.

That's all I got.

Thank you, Mr.

Ferrari's for your comments.

I have a question about the retain wall on the rear.

Uh six feet.

Is it a fence going right on top of that?

Yes, we'll have a six-foot opaque fence on top of that as well.

Right on the property line on the on the side.

It'll be, I think, five foot off the property line, but obviously on top of the fence, centered on the fence.

Yeah, just wondering.

I know that site's got some.

I live out that way, so that site's got some pretty steep aggressive slope.

Um, I just wanted to know how that were approaching that.

Yes, ma'am.

Hi, Alan Parsons at 8713 Lee Circle.

I just have a question about the amount of traffic that's gonna come out on 87th Street, and getting out of there now, it's very hard to get on Rogers.

And then we have to go over to Mazard, and the traffic on Mazard now is very difficult to get out.

So how much is that gonna affect our neighborhoods?

Is the applicant have any questions?

I mean, there are study, there are traffic studies, I believe, that are performed uh regarding the development plan, that sort of thing.

Our engineering department does look on all at each development and assesses the traffic flow on both you know local road and Rogers Avenue, but when they do that, they will assess it both, having the availability of using both Rogers Avenue and 87th.

And we did have a pre-development meeting with all the other city departments, like we do with most larger developments like this, and currently in the engineering department did not uh voice any concerns uh with this design.

Um now the front half is is zone C5 and on Rogers Avenue.

So I'm assuming with that exit and entrance there on Rogers Avenue, and that's probably why they did not have any concerns.

And additionally, I like State Rogers Avenue as a state highway, so also R Dot will be involved with that.

So could Rot overrualize or overrule the development plan, or how does that work?

We uh so the applicant has to comply with ROT, and the city will not approve it until R dot approves both the driveway location for any development that's on on the C.

So that's part of our requirement package, similar to airport approval if something's close to the approach zone.

We require the applicant or developer to provide us the information from the state of Arkansas giving that approval.

And regarding the traffic, that diagonal road across the lot, it's with phase one, correct?

Yes, sir.

And so I I think the majority of the traffic entering the property will probably be using that drive coming up, the main drive.

Um, I doubt they'll pull on to 87th.

Exiting, there could be some people that hit 87th because it might just be more convenient, but I I think the majority of the traffic's gonna use that center aisle uh the of the development when they're visiting that site.

All right, any other comments or questions again.

Every everybody's welcome.

This is your opportunity if you're here tonight and have any, please come forward.

Yes, ma'am.

That's why we have a public hearing, so please voice any comments or questions you have.

Anybody.

My name is Julie Wakefield.

I live at 4000 Gascony Way, which is on the corner of Gascony and Lee Street.

I was wondering if any consideration had been given to the fact that traffic will increase on Lee Street.

Because it is a cutoff from Massard Road to 87th, directly to 87th.

We already have people who are using that as a shortcut to get further down Rogers and avoid traffic on Phoenix and Massard Road and Rogers and Massard Road.

And so I will be very sure that traffic is going to increase along Lee Avenue or Lee Street.

So has any consideration been given to Lee Street?

Thank you for those comments.

Uh Mr.

Goodwin.

We work with city engineering staff, you know, to review what influx of traffic we're gonna have.

And at this time, you know, no obviously of the area and said, hey, this is what we're thinking what it was.

Uh I haven't recommended any improvement.

We made it to the public infrastructure at this time, but we'd be willing to work with them and say, Hey, we need to add something traffic towards Roger.

Because uh I have a very short driveway, and I will be having to pull out backwards onto Lee Street with increased traffic.

Uh and that will decrease my property values because who wants to buy a house where the only access is onto a road that has increased traffic, and also it's a residential neighborhood.

We have families there with children that ride their bikes around the neighborhood, people who walk for exercise, and they're going to be put at risk when they're out going to and from on Lee Street.

So I haven't heard any concerns here about what that's going to be like for me and for the other people whose only access to their homes is on Lee Street.

Certainly appreciate those concerns, and it is a well everyone here knows it's well-established neighborhood.

Uh you know, fortunately and unfortunately, the growth is out east to the city toward your neighborhood.

Um any general questions or comments.

I mean, obviously that's part of our consideration on our votes, and uh uh and believe me, it's not gone unheard.

Regardless of the vote, you know, your comments are appreciated and understood.

I appreciate you hearing.

Thank you.

Anyone else, please?

This is your opportunity.

Yes, ma'am, absolutely.

Okay, would you would you ma'am?

Could you just come up again?

Sorry.

How's this back to our park first?

We will be having uh you know, public well, we plan on doing public infrastructure extensions, extending eight-inch water line into property service, so it will use water pressure, but I don't think it'll have an adverse effect where production whatever.

So two things there.

One, I'd like to say uh for the record, because this is recorded and it's live that she asked how the water pressure would be affected.

Um so when when you do ask those, try to step up, Jackson.

Um that way we can when we go back to type the minutes.

Um our city utility engineering department looks at all plan reviews.

Uh Jackson or Mr.

Goodwin is an engineer as well.

He has to provide the hydrolysis or the analysis and those engineering numbers to make sure that that complies uh with the water pressures and those flow rates within the city, and that's not just this development, it's all developments.

So there's minimum uh standards that they can't, you know.

You you can't develop that without providing that infrastructure that maintains that uh uh water pressure, and that's why we have those engineers within our utility department to review the engineering analysis that he puts together approving and showing that.

All right, any other comments or questions?

All good comments, appreciate all of those.

All right, um I don't believe we actually have a motion on the floor for the rezoning, so I'll ask for a uh on item 14 a motion to be on the floor with the rezoning.

Make a motion to approve of the addition of staff comments, second.

I think Rhett seconded.

Yeah, any other comments or questions?

Just before the vote, I just like to say for the record, Commissioner Coleman and Commissioner Marshall had to leave for other obligations, so they will not be voting, participating.

So anyway, at that moment then I'll ask for a vote.

Vicky Newton, four Griffin Hannah?

Four.

David Tyler, four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor?

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Six in favor, opposed.

Right.

Uh item 15 is the development plan, and I'll ask for a motion to get item 15 on the development plan.

Motion approved with the addition of staff comments.

Second.

All right.

Any other comments or questions?

No, sir.

All right.

We'll ask for a vote, please on item 15.

Four.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Brett Taylor.

Four.

Kelly Wilson.

Four.

Six in favor, zero.

And with that, we will adjourn the meeting and have a good rest of your evening.

Thank you very much.