All right, uh good evening, everyone, and welcome to the City of Fort Smith Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Adjustment July meeting.

I'd ask everybody to please stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Primary allegiance of the United States of America and two Republic or one nation under God, indivisible liberty, and justice for all.

All right, I'd ask for a roll call of the commissioners present tonight.

Brett Taylor, Vicky Newton, Rod Coleman, Kelly Wilson here.

Griffin Hannah.

Here.

David Tyler.

Jackson Mendenhall.

Sean McCaffrey.

Here.

We have seven commissioners present.

All right.

Our next item is the approval of the June 9th, 2026 Planning Commission minutes.

If uh Commissioner have that opportunity to review it, I ask for a motion to approve or amend.

All right.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Um I'll ask the staff to present our staff comments and procedures for tonight's meeting.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the July 14, 2026 Planning Commission meeting.

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

This evening, the Planning Commission will be reviewing the following items.

The existing parking lot complies with the UDO.

The site has two existing shared access driveways uh located on R.A.

Young uh drive and on Wells Lake Road.

Uh the nursery school will use the existing driveway and parking lot.

Uh there was a neighborhood meeting that was held uh on July the 8th uh uh 2026 on site at 911 RA Young Junior Drive.

Uh no neighboring property owners attended the meeting.

Uh the applicant did receive three calls prior to the meeting from people not able to attend.

All three calls had general uh questions to understand the intent of the meeting and the general questions regarding uh the business.

Uh no one expressed opposition.

Uh for staff comments, the applicant is uh requesting conditional use approval for a nursery school within the existing office building at uh 911 RA Young Junior Drive.

The applicant has stated that this location will be the startup location for the nursery business and plans to seek approval for a new location in the future if the organization expands.

Uh the program is intentionally structured to support uh different developmental stages while offering flexibility for families who may not uh need a full day of service.

Uh staff recommends approval contingent upon construction complying with a submitted development plan.

Uh changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted, but eliminated those described in sections 27 through 307 of the UDO.

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

Any questions?

All right, I appreciate it.

Are there is there are those in here in the audience tonight in favor of the application?

If you'd raise your hand, anyone in favor?

Anyone opposed to this application this evening?

Okay.

Um in that case I'd ask for um motion to get this on the floor, please.

Make a motion to approve with staff comments.

Second.

All right.

Is there any other comments or questions from the commissioners?

Talked again and at the study session.

All right.

Is there a playground that's being associated with this?

Not at this time.

They don't have any outdoor space.

No.

All right.

Any other comments?

Oh, yes.

I'm sorry.

Nicole Swanson with the hub.

They actually do have a small section of outdoor space uh that is associated right next to that building in DHS requirements approved at the area and location for them.

You're welcome.

Can you show us here real quick, Nicole?

Is it right there on the left side of the building?

It is right there on the left side of the building.

Yes.

And I assume they'll probably fence that in.

It will have a portable fence so that it will be put out every morning and put it back in every evening.

Understood.

Thank you.

Yes.

So does that not need to be shown in a site plan or that's fine if it's temporary portable?

Yeah, typically we do see those on the site plans.

Uh well, and I'm glad that came up now because if it came up later, that would have uh had the staff uh, you know, in in a rock and a hard spot.

Uh it's kind of up to the planning commission now since it's just a portable fence.

If it was a permanent fence, it would have to be shown.

All right.

Any other comments or questions?

Not all.

I guess Nicole, does it DHS is okay with a portable fence?

Yeah.

DHS was actually okay with no fence at all.

The owner of the establishment wanted to have the ability to have the portable fence.

Okay.

Just for the safety of the children.

Okay.

Thank you.

And it was only up to five years old, right?

Correct.

Okay.

Yes.

All right.

Very good.

Anything else?

All right.

I'll ask for a vote then.

Sean McCaffrey?

Four.

Vicki Newton.

Four.

David Tyler?

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Rod Coleman.

Griffin Hanna.

Four.

Jackson Menadall?

Four.

Six in favor, one abstention.

Commissioner Coleman.

Okay, we'll move to item two on the agenda, which is a conditional use at 501 South 16th Street.

Yes.

Conditional use 11726, a request by Garrett Family Trust, owner for a primary and secondary school in a transitional zone at 501 South 16th Street.

Approval will allow the existing 5,322 square foot building to be utilized as a primary and secondary school with six classrooms for approximately 60 to 70 students aged preschool to 12th grade.

The school will operate Monday through Thursday from 9 a.m.

to 2 p.m.

Student attendance will be divided into two groups alternating on a two-day per week program with a maximum of 35 students per day.

The subject property is on the southeast corner of South 16th Street and South D Street.

The track contains an area of 0.68 acres with approximately 187 feet of street frontage along South 16th Street and approximately 116 feet of street frontage along South D Street.

The site will utilize the two existing driveways located on the South 16th Street and South D Street.

The school will also utilize the existing alley located to the rear of the property to ex access four existing parking spaces.

The applicant intends to utilize the existing parking on site and the alley access for the pickup and drop off of students.

A neighborhood meeting was held on site on June 12th, 2026 at 5 30 p.m.

No neighboring property owners were in attendance.

The applicant received one phone call in support of the project from Wilson's appraisal group located across the street at 512 South 16th Street.

Additionally, planning staff received a phone call from a neighboring property owner that was in opposition to the request stating that the new use would increase traffic.

Approval will allow the existing 5,322 square foot building and property to be utilized as a primary and secondary school for a maximum of 35 students per day.

The school will offer supplemental education to homeschool students in grades preschool through 12th grade.

The applicant has devised a two-point pickup drop-off plan utilizing the front parking lot and the alley in an effort to mitigate traffic congestion and proposes a fenced playground area.

Staff recommends approval contingent upon construction complying with the submitted development plan.

Changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted but limited to those described in section 27 337 of the UDO.

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

All right.

Thank you very much.

Are there those in favor of this application?

Please raise your hand.

Anyone opposed this evening?

All right.

All right.

I just asked for the commission vote from the uh excuse me, a motion from the commissioners to get this on the floor, please.

Yes.

Oh, was there one?

Yes, sir.

I do have a question.

All right.

Come on up and state your name and address again.

My name is Mario Guerlay.

Address is 501 South 17th.

Uh, they did address the playground issue that I had a question about.

Y'all are gonna use that adjacent parking lot, is that correct?

Mr.

Garrett, do you want to come up and speak?

Perry Garrett 7000 Highland Park, Fort Smith.

Uh the playground is going to be on the lot next to it.

We got the lot there, so it'll be fenced in at some point, probably not right now, but probably in the next month or two, the next couple of months plan.

Okay.

Have you guys um have you all I guess done a survey in the study of the foot traffic that comes up and down that road with the uh foot traffic as far as the hope campus that's down that way?

No, we have not.

Okay.

What are you guys planning to put into place as far as security goes for the students for the staff and even for the neighboring uh community as far as the foot traffic and the well-being of the students?

So we're not doing any security for the neighboring community, but we're gonna have security that we've already got ADT that we've already put a security system in, but we're gonna do a camera system also for the property there in the school to cover the playground and all the entrances to from the building.

Okay.

Do you have anybody that's gonna man the staff as far as the security?

Or will your staff be um trained in security measures as well as no?

These are teachers.

This are these are teachers, is what they are.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Those are my questions.

Anything else will be up here, sir?

Any comments or questions from the commissioners?

Where does everyone park?

Uh people they drop off.

There's two drop-offs, one in the front, one in the back, and there'll be a teacher at the front and the back both, and they do it by their name, like A through M will be in the front, and then M through would be on the back.

And it's at 9 to 2, so it's going to be like not in the prime time, is what I think.

How many staff members do you are?

Probably around 6.

Okay.

And there's enough parking, uh, I suspect for everyone's staff is there.

Yeah, yes, it complies with the UDO.

It's based off the number of classrooms.

Is that correct?

Yeah.

Yes.

Is the plan to do the playground on the front end or is that later down the road?

It's we hope to do it in the next couple of months, but it's it's going to be the first semester.

It's just that we we we're doing a lot of other re you know, rework if you will.

Okay.

When you do the playground, do they have to put sidewalks down?

This is maybe a question for the city.

Do you guys have to have sidewalks down through there when you do the playground or there's actually some existing uh steps that go up to it?

They're existing, they're uh they've been there for quite a while.

This playground was evidently a parking lot at one time.

It's got like gravel all in it.

So I'm gonna try to move the gravel out if you if you will.

But anyway, long story short, I don't think there'll be any side.

There's a sidewalk in front that will go up to the steps, and at the at those steps will be a gate and it'll be a lock gate, but the teacher will have a way to get into it.

Sure.

Okay.

The city engineering department did not require a traffic study for this, and I believe that's because it's limited to just 35 students maximum at any given time.

Okay.

All right.

And yeah.

So if it was a larger school, you know, like some of the other schools we've seen most definitely.

Is there any uh anticipation to expand at some point and with what would they would have to come back in and do a new development plan and all that?

That's correct.

If they expanded from their uh anything from this development plan from the floor plan uh or expanded the building, they would have to come back to you all for approval and also through all the different city apartments for review.

Okay.

Actually, we're hoping to get 30 to 35.

That's what we're hoping.

All right.

Yes, Mr.

Good.

I may have heard the incorrect.

You said it was only gonna be a max of 35 students for K pre-K through 12.

Well, it's it's not gonna be pre-K through 12 start with it.

Maybe in the future, if it grows, those students will move forward that we're getting.

Uh so it'll be like the 30, 35.

We hope that we get 30 to 35, and hopefully those students will stay with it and progress along.

So what grade levels are you going to begin?

Five it'll be uh five-year-olds to about ten year olds through the fifth grade, kindergarten to fifth grade.

Okay, so kindergarten through fifth grade, so you're expecting six classrooms, roughly about six students.

Five, we hope about five per classroom.

You know, but some days it could be like if Mondays and Wednesdays are the days that we get more people signed up, but you may end up having 33 or 3435, but then on the on the Tuesdays and Thursday classes, you would have a little less.

You would end up having say 25.

If I had 35, I'd have 25 on the other.

Okay, so if I'm following this, you may have a total of maybe between, and correct me if I'm on between fifty to sixty kids because Monday, Wednesday we'd have this set of students.

No.

Okay.

No, okay.

You're not following them because it it's 30 to 35 max on any given day.

If these kids are going on Mondays, they come on Mondays and Wednesdays.

They won't come on Tuesdays and Thursdays, unless they sign up for all four days, but it'd be the same amount of students.

It won't go over that.

It won't go over the 35.

But your roll count for individual students could be up to about 60 students.

Never on any given day.

But the total total total, if you count, it'd be like any school.

If you had 30 students in a class and they went five days, you know, you'd have 150 students.

Okay.

It's the same, you know, it's the same thing.

Are we talking two days out of the week?

These 25 students potentially are coming, getting their learning, and then the other two days, potentially another set of 25 students are coming and getting their learning.

Or hopefully up to 35 to get us to where we need to be.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

I'm sorry, anything else?

No.

Any anything else?

Anyone?

All right.

All right, I'll ask for a motion then to get this on the floor.

Make a motion to approve the staff comments.

Second.

Right, I'll ask for a vote.

Jackson Mendetall.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Vicky Nitton.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Rod Common?

Four.

Griffin Hannah?

Four.

Seven in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

Uh and the next item on the agenda is uh item three, a conditional use uh at 8411 South 28th Street.

Conditional use 12726, a request by Barrett and Associates agent for KM Enterprises, Fort Smith LLC, for an addition to a nursing home and a transitional zone at 8411 South 28th Street.

Approval facilitates the construction of a 2,719 square foot residential addition for eight new residents with an outside patio.

Approval allows for the new 336 square foot maintenance building and 26 new on-site parking spaces with landscaping.

The subject property is on the east side of South 28th Street between Grinnell Avenue and Kendall Avenue.

The track contains an area of 5.73 acres with approximately 400 feet of street frontage along South 28th Street.

The development will continue to utilize the existing single existing driveway located on South 28th Street.

Uh parking lot screening and perimeter landscaping has been provided adjacent to the new parking spaces located on South 28th Street.

Additionally, perimeter landscaping and parking lot screening will be provided on the northern green space as well as the addition of six new interior trees as shown on the plan.

The building addition is comprised of 100% high quality materials consisting of brick and vinyl.

A neighborhood meeting was held on site on July 7th, 2026 at 530 p.m.

Three neighboring property owners attended the meeting and have listed concerns regarding the existing drainage issues located on the north side of the existing nursing home campus.

The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,719 square foot residential addition to accommodate eight new resident living quarters with a 336 square foot maintenance building and 26 new on-site parking spaces.

Staff recommends approval contingent upon construction complying with the submitted development plan.

Changes or amendments to the submitted development plan are permitted, but limited those described in section 27 337 of the UDO.

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

Additionally, staff requests an additional contingency not shown on your site on your uh report based on neighborhood concerns.

The applicant must provide a formal drainage analysis for the City of Fort Smith Engineering Department review that complies with the 2011 storm drainage standards prior to the issuance of a building permit.

All right, very good.

And just to reiterate, there was a new addition to the staff comments regarding the drainage tower.

Do you have any additional comments really on that at all?

No, that's that second comment that Megan said it was not in your PC packets for the uh the drainage analysis for our engineers to look at it a little bit better.

They've been uh conversing back and forth with their designer or consultant about that, and I let them know the applicant know today that that will be a requirement for the building permit, or we're asking for it to be a condition placed on by the planning commission.

Uh what it is is the you can see the detention pond here is existing.

They have uh some swells here, but there's also a drainage ditch back here, kind of on the houses that's off-site behind the fence.

This drainage goes out here and then out through here.

But the problem is some of these neighbors have some some potential drainage issues.

So in and it may or may not be uh anything with this small addition down here on the nursing home, but our engineering department is gonna look at it.

They did provide some information or uh just here recently in the end of last week showing how this drainage pond, you know, drains out this way.

Uh again, they just want to make sure calculate some numbers based off this detention pond, these few additions and a few other small additions over the years uh that this pond complies with that.

All this is private infrastructure for drainage.

And again, we just want to confirm that it meets uh and complies with the 2011 storm drainage standards.

So I have a question.

Would would normally that study have been performed at this middle of the application?

Because are we denying an opportunity for these neighbors or the public to comment if we vote tonight and whichever way we vote, but the study hasn't been done yet.

So we don't really have the benefit of that.

Sure.

Um it could go either way.

Normally the studies require when there's an acre of disturbance, and this is far less than an acre.

When the R engineers first looked at it, they said this was far less than an acre of disturbed ground grass, right?

If it's grass, if it's already asphalt or concrete, and as you can tell there, the majority of that of where they're constructing is already parking.

They're just adding a few, I'll go back to the site plan here.

Uh a few different little areas there that will do it.

So they thought of it as insignificant.

However, uh some of that drainage system is definitely on the radar, and it could be it could be city drainage things that they look at as far as capital improvement projects in the future.

Uh so engineering's first review was no, they did not think it needed it, but they said since the complaints and I brought it up a few times that hey, we could have some drainage issues here.

They would like to study in the numbers that it complies with the additional runoff from the structures.

My first assumption is that it shouldn't affect it at all.

However, until those numbers are in, we will not know.

So is there an opportunity for the neighbors to comment on the study that's performed?

There is not.

But the study would have to or be required to follow the minimum of the City of Port Smith's 2011 draining stage.

So what in and if it so when they come, let's say you all approve this tonight, it will be reviewed at the building permit stage, which it's currently in right now, but the building permit will not be issued until our engineers say that it complies with the city's regulations for drainage, which basically you can't make it worse.

All right.

Sorry about that.

Kind of jumped ahead.

Are there those here in favor of the uh app uh in favor of the application tonight?

Anyone opposed tonight?

Yes, sir.

If you come up and state your name and address if you'd like to.

You don't have to speak, but if you'd like to, you're more than welcome to.

No, I'm not much of a public speaker.

That's okay.

Since I own three of those duplexes on the other side of the ditch on Grinnell.

If you'll state your name and address my name is Robert Allen.

I live at 4909 Cliff Drive.

I've been a real estate broker for 48 years, been in the rental business for 45 years, and I have consistently had problems with the city not maintaining their own drainage ditch along right there.

And the other one that goes into a culvert that ends up in the back yard of one of my duplexes.

I already have a sinkhole there, which already indicates if this addition is built that it is inadequate to take the flow to Mill Creek from Grinnell on, unless something is done.

And I have an engineer study from Carl Gales, who helped laid out Ben Garrin Park.

He's up in the years now, but he looked at it in 2000, and this is his letter.

And what he recommended was in my recommendation, a service concrete drainage swell should be constructed along the south and east property lines, which would create positive surface drainage for the yard and act as a relief drain for the underground concrete drainage product.

It is probable that due to the increased runoff created by the nursing home located south of this property, that the instantaneous peak runoff quantities will exceed the capacity of the existing subservice drainage structures.

And is already 26 years later, even after they constructed two culverts in the back of 2822 Grinnell, it's exceeded its capacity to handle the runoff.

And building an addition with more parking lot, with more roof lines with water running off is only going to increase that flow.

Now in 2011, I asked the planning commission, can I submit my own uh engineer study?

And we wanted to do it, but they denied me.

They went ahead and they passed the project.

So here we are, 15 years later, addressing the issue of why the city cannot concrete this ditch and widen the culvert even bigger at 2822 Grinnell.

So for their project to go on, they should alleviate a problem that has been going on for 26 years since the rest home was built.

Now I I have no objections to progress, but when it affects mine, I have sinkholes now there, which the city after a month they went out and filled it.

Uh but it's gonna occur again.

So uh an extensive engineering study should be done on the drainage there before the permit is granted.

All right, thank you for those comments.

Would the applicant like to respond?

Good evening.

I'm Mike Haythorn.

I'm one of the owners of Vienna Hills Nursing and Rehab, which is KMJ Enterprises Fort Smith LLC.

Thanks for letting me attend today.

Um I think we've got two things going on.

Our new project is only eight beds.

Um we're a 102 bed facility.

The state recently awarded us another eight licensed beds for private rooms because the occupancy is over 90 percent for the last 12 months or rolling 12, so that um we have we often have a waiting list and we need to be able to accommodate more residents.

So that's the point of the need for it, and I think the community very much needs it.

Sebastian County actually has some of the highest numbers of occupancy in the state, so there very much is a need for it.

Um as far as the difference in the footprint, it never occurred to us that this would even be an issue because this is only a 2% increase in the amount of impervious um land in the in the whole footprint.

So it's a very minor change.

However, if there is an existing problem, I'll be honest, I did not realize this problem existed until this started happening, or until this process began.

As I told Tyler today, we we'll comply and do whatever we need to to uh to help alleviate the problem.

If it's if it's if we're it's being caused by us, if it's on our on our land on our footprint, we'll fix whatever we need to.

We're we're happy to do that.

We want to be good corporate citizens and a part of the community.

Um I do have though with us um our engineer David Garza, who is far more versed in drainage issues than I will ever be.

And so if it's okay, I'll stand here for any questions and I'll ask David to come up and maybe answer any specifics on the drainage issues.

You're behind me, I'll get look.

Thank you for your time, Commissioners.

Um I did meet with Robert and with the Morrises at the community meeting as well as Megan.

Uh we had uh drinks and other good stuff there.

But the the drainage study there came about after the meeting.

So I told them, you know, as they were explaining, and I listened, um, probably for at least 30 minutes, and I asked questions about the uh how the drainage was uh doing, you know, what what was happening at what periods, and so I told them after the meeting I would go trace it out.

So that's what I did.

I traced that out to see what was going on to see if I could figure out anything.

A couple of things that I did find out.

Uh one, just like he had said, if that concrete ditch behind the houses, if they would put that concrete ditch in there, uh that would probably help because right now I think it's just widening out, isn't it?

It's just sheet flow.

Yeah, yeah, there's there's not much of a ditch there.

There's water there, it's a mosquito.

Yeah, you can see it there, but once it passes that house and gets to his, it flattens out.

So it just sheet flows through there.

And I think it's trying to get into an inlet uh in the back behind the fence that has four openings.

I don't think you can you can't see it because it's in the trees.

It's where I show it right there.

The inlet right right there.

That's got four openings in it, but it's gonna have to come through the fence to get there.

Mr.

Robert alluded that he has sinkholes in there.

I found something interesting.

The north section of that pipe is an arch pipe, but the south section going north is a 24-inch round pipe.

So where'd the connection?

Yeah, so that may be the sinkhole problem.

Those are city pipes, right?

Yes, right.

Right.

So somewhere in there is is either they shoved a 24-inch into the arch pipe or they tried to cap it, and it has probably fallen apart.

And so now what you get is as water goes through there and it comes up, it softens that soil, and then when it goes down, it pulls it with it.

So you're having softening, pull, softening, pull, softening pull, and eventually it gets more and more that silk gets down to where you have sinkhole.

I worked for the city of Russellville for seven and a half years, and we've had those same problems.

You know, we found the same thing.

Then once you get past that, as you go across the street, uh, I had our engineer look at it, and he asked about that facility across the street.

We mapped it out.

There's 1.6 acres coming down to that swag.

Now that the road is a swag if you've never been there.

It where the two inlets are, that's a low point.

So the water comes from both directions, comes down there.

Typically, when you have a wag uh swag situation, you have some way up for an overflow if it gets too high.

Uh, I couldn't see any way for it to overflow.

So, what's it gonna do?

It's gonna flood, you know, during certain periods.

Another thing we saw that the inlet to the south is only a six-foot opening, then to the north is only a four for a swag for 1.6 acres of runoff coming to that, and that doesn't include their houses, their driveways, and the street coming to it.

That's not very big opening.

So that was uh another red flag there, and then the pipe going back to the east is only a 24-inch.

If everything is coming to that point there at the swag, the pipe going back to the east, which would be the outlet, should have been 36, just like the others.

Another thing in my report uh that I noticed is where the 36-inch starts and goes north, it looked like it was corrugated metal pipe.

Uh the rest of it, I couldn't find a junction box where it came together with the 36-inch RCP pipe.

And looking on the aerial photographs, it looked like that parking lot had been there for a while, which means the arch pipe has probably been there for a long time, which then leads me to believe the bottom is rusted out, and when the bottom of a of an arch pipe rusts out, what happens is you you have that bottom, you have all the grit coming through there during the storm.

And when the bottom of a of an arch pipe rusts out, what happens is you you have that bottom, you have all the grit coming through there during the storm.

Uh it creates jagged fins that curl because of the pressure of the pipes coming down.

So it curls that up, and then any debris, and anything comes down there starts catching, and it starts building this.

So my report, I said the first thing I would do is I would lower someone down there.

Now it is eight foot deep, that inlet, so it's gonna be you have to have a harness because it's gonna enclose structure.

Eight foot deep, shine a light through there and see if the problem is that it has a stoppage.

It's not allowing all the way that that would be the first thing I would do to check that, and and that was in the report.

If it's clear and clean, then I would consider changing that 24 inch pipe to 36, and then adding two wings to the north on that four, so you have 12 foot uh because 12 foot is gonna be a a normal four foot inlet uh will take anywhere from 1.5 to 3.5 cubic feet.

Just the the normal tenure storm for that parking lot area, we calculated about 10 cubic feet per second, coming down to that intersection.

Uh and then the six inch would probably be about five.

So if you had if you had the max 3.5 and and five, that's eight point five.

You got ten, you that's one and a half cubic feet, you can't account for, can't get in there, not to mention all of their area.

So with all that said, that is likely the problem.

Um we're only increasing the impervious area of this new development by two percent, and most drainage manuals have an exemption.

Uh we we just started talking about this this morning, so I have not been able to go through the drainage manual yet.

So they normally have an exemption for like 10% uh or less your exempt from any study.

Uh so but we're willing to do what whatever you guys want to do.

I mean, I want to help the neighbors.

I've been in contact with Bob, I've been in contact with the Morrises.

I sent them that map to let them know, hey, this is what's going on there, this is what I found.

Um I'm not from this area, but I still like helping people.

That's just my nature.

So I would ask if you're going to make a motion to grant the uh conditional use with the condition that a drainage study is required.

Would you add the language if it's required in the manual?

That's all I'd ask.

Because if it's not required, then I don't want to waste it.

I I staff would disagree with that.

If uh part of our approval was recommending approval of requiring that analysis, and that was dealing with our city engineers late today as well.

We we want that studying to make sure that complies with the city's 2011 uh uh drainage standards.

Uh there was, you know, pre some other smaller additions on the side as well.

So uh, you know, those are the two comments that staff wanted that way we can confirm it complies with our current and existing C codes, even for the two percent.

Uh and like I said from my from the beginning, I agree with you.

I I don't think the two percent is going to affect it much, but we'll want to see those numbers and uh have it just as uh Megan stated stated it on the approval comment.

Okay, well, you guys yeah, I mean you guys know your manual.

I don't, so if that's what it says, like I said, I was just if if it did have that exemption in it, then I was just wanting it stated in the record.

But if there's not, then yeah, we'll do it.

Is the two percent include the addition of parking spaces or just the building?

The whole thing.

So what we did is we did we did an outline of the entire area as it is right now with all the way around.

So we also included the grass area.

So we just did an outline of what's existing.

Now we're moving the existing road that goes across the south to the south, and we added those parking spaces and then the ones over to this side.

So after we did that, we and that was two point um two point nine six acres.

Then we did an outline of what we're proposing, and it came to three point oh one acres, so that's two percent.

Oh well, I'm I'm curious about the increase in impervious surface area.

That was the increase to of two percent.

Yeah, I think that was the increase.

Because we're still either either uh polyline is still including the same green space.

Okay.

So I do have some questions for staff though.

So and I guess you guys, the owner, um, when was this original building built?

And the det when was the detention pond built?

That I don't think 99.

When it was originally it was originally a 70 bed facility, I think it was built in 99, licensed, I want to say 2000.

It may have been right at the end of 99.

And it the detention pond was built with the original building.

Yes, but it was probably I'm guessing we would have had to have increased that when we added the additional beds.

Okay.

Because it's gone from 70 to 90 to 102.

Oh, okay.

So when was the last time it was engineered though?

Oh gosh.

And approved by the city.

Well, see, we used to not have to come in front of the commission the same process.

So I don't know that I can speak to that.

Uh the additional addition was probably 2017, maybe.

Right.

Seems right.

It seems somewhere in there.

Give you give or take.

So if the city approved the detention pond engineering, there was a conditional use in 2011, but there hasn't been an addition since then.

Right.

But it was 11.

So if their engineering was approved for the detention pond, I mean, doesn't this seem like it's more of a city issue with the pipes down the line?

Not as they add additions.

So yes, as it if it is the pipes down line.

That's you know his assumption, not analysis.

That's why we want the analysis done.

Nobody can be sure until they do the the study and the work to show that and and also show the numbers.

Uh it is possible too, uh, if you think about like new development, like some of you are aware, when a brand new development comes in with uh a detention pond since 2011.

Now this was constructed before 2011, technically wasn't required, but I imagine at that time you said 99 that that this came up.

The detention ponds uh supposed to satisfy the 70, 80 beds at that time.

Well, as they expanded, say uh, you know, 2005, 2001 or 11, our storm uh drainage standards were not in place until sometime in 2011.

So if they you know were in January 2011 and our storm drainage standards, so you know we upped those, and that's why you see those new detention ponds.

So the smaller development at the time, you know, was satisfied it.

As it's grown over the years, I don't know if it's satisfied satisfied it or not.

So maybe the t detention pond may need to be a little bit bigger, or maybe the outlet height needs to be smaller.

I mean, those are questions that that that's why staff wanted that engineering analysis before the uh uh uh building permit issuance.

Okay.

Now the staff has has uh informed us through email that all they want the analysis is to the north line or just the development, but not beyond that.

Okay, so we won't know what's going on downstream.

Okay.

Oh, and by the way, David Garza with Barrett and Associates for the record, I forgot to say that.

And I would like to state that after visiting with our engineering staff for a good hour and a half today.

W this went round around at my office.

Uh it's on our engineering staff.

Uh you some of you may know Ben Marts and then Todd, the new engineer, uh, there as well.

This is on their uh uh uh they're putting on a list for a review during a rain so they can go out there and look at it, video it and look at it.

And I'm happy to share that with the the citizen or one of my staff members can share that contact or give them a card and we can get them in contact as well.

So listening to just at least your points on there is probably a high likelihood that there might be some city improvements that needs to be done.

Understand that.

I understand the point that this might only affect two percent of the impervious space.

Okay.

This is not a big addition that you're talking about here.

Correct.

But sticking to the current state.

Just looking at that uh there was a plan that showed the drainage system plan.

So looking at there is an existing berm on that north side of the site plan there.

It looks like it's supposed to go the whole way, but it does look like it is starting to weather out.

I'm just trying to figure is is there a compromise today that can be made with the property owners to where you'd build up the berm?

I mean, this is not something that I would recommend being contingent on the plan.

Just find trying to find a way to yes here.

Obviously, we need to get the engineering review all that as well, but I don't know if there's some compromise offline that can be done that would hopefully try and find some compromise.

Yeah, there's not very much there, but what we did tell the the those that were at the meeting on the east side.

Yeah.

So they were concerned about water not getting into the detention and going northeast side or the very east side.

The very east line of the property behind those houses.

Yeah, come straight down.

So right there.

So they were concerned that water was bypassing the pond and going behind the houses.

So what I told them we would do is we could do a diversion ditch there all the way down to the south end of our property line, right along that tree line.

Because we want to keep the trees uh because it for visual but uh we'll put a diversion ditch and then into the pond to make sure that nothing in that field, even though there's already a ditch there, but nothing on that side of the field would go that direction.

That and they seem to be okay with that.

Okay.

That was the Morrisons, because the Morrisons live right directly north.

Is where they're having so they have a lot of water they're seeing that's coming into their backyard from that cold de sac area right there.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's Roberts.

Roberts are the three to the left of the pipe.

And then about four houses down, is that right, Robert?

About four houses down.

Right.

Right.

And then Morris's is about four over.

And they're about where the arrow is, I think.

Three over, and they're getting a bunch of water in their backyard.

When do we anticipate getting that engineering study done?

They will have to do it before the issuance of a building permit.

So if this was approved, there's still a ten day appeal process so they can start working with our engineers and get that done uh regardless of that appeal process doesn't change.

Would the appeal process go to us or does that go up to the board?

Oh so there's always a ten day uh appeal waiting period.

Right.

So if you all approved it, there's ten days before it can move forward at all.

If someone chose to appeal it, it would go to the board of directors at that time.

Um but regardless, as long as the engineering study was required, uh it would depend on Mr.

David here and and his uh owner to provide that information to our engineering staff because you know the planning commission is voting on the conditional use and the building permit would be after, and that building permit wouldn't be released until our engineers were satisfied.

Right.

And so what we're gonna do is we're gonna fly it with a drone and we have LIDAR, and uh whether we do it or we hire another firm that's here that we know very well to do that to the drainage basin for us, might be a good time for engineering to get with the same group and do that part.

That way kill two birds with one stone.

That way you see the whole thing.

So it might be a you know, Mr.

Miller, you might talk to them and say if we're gonna do that, I can give them contact who it is and see what it would cost, you know, to get that part done.

I mean that's that's up to you.

They're all on that email chain that we're in, so you'll need to order that.

Okay, I can do that.

Sure.

I can do that.

Yeah.

I'm just thinking, you know, if they're there, it would save the city money.

Uh and that's what I always do is save money.

Use it somewhere else.

Time sidewalks, you know.

Tell me what tell me exactly what you're doing with the with the drainage study.

What what what tell them what they're studying, because you've got three different problems here, and you're not going to solve it with a drainage study.

That that that's correct.

So what they're doing is what this study will do, we'll look at what this addition and maybe a few of the other editions to make sure that that detention pond that they have on site will settle their improvements that are on site.

So the way that it you know I mean, as you know, a detention pond should hold the water and then release it at a slower rate into that, and that's the study they'll look at.

They won't be looking it's not their job to look at this other infrastructure, even this neighborhood, uh, for instance, this berm was brought up a couple times.

This has nothing to do with the nursing home right here this ditch.

And that's why I mentioned that our engineering department put it on a schedule to go out there and look at that, and we can get him in contact with our city engineers.

This is off site.

That's not a good thing.

So go back to where the the other one that's got the pipes that engineer showed.

Yeah, right there.

So they go in there, they're two percent increase, they take the detention pond, they dig out around it, they dig it deeper, whatever they got to do to hold more water, is not gonna fix any of that.

I just want you, I mean we're wasting your money.

That that's yeah.

Because if it can't get out to the pipe and get out of the deal, you can make that thing twenty feet deep and it's not gonna solve that problem.

Is that a public is that a public drainage?

Yeah, is that public or private?

I'm I'm not entirely sure on that.

Uh I know that everything on their side on the nursing home side is private.

So but so they would not be responsible for me thing from there on.

Right.

Well, I'm gonna share with you as a developer.

I would do that drainage study to cover that piece up there so that you're covering yourself with the city.

I that's why I'm asking about the drainage study, and I'm not I'm picking insides, but that that subdivision was planted in 1980 two, three, one, somewhere in there.

And I don't ever I don't remember and we did it.

I don't remember there being that pipe in there, and it wouldn't have been in there before then because you weren't there till ninety-nine.

Right.

So to me to have that menagerie of different pipes that run through there and it goes through that parking lot of a church.

I can't imagine those are public easements.

There is no so he's pumping private water through a private system that in my opinion is the cities.

I mean, if we're supposed to get out of the line, we we developers are responsible for getting water off our property into yours, city, in the way that you want it released slowly, or at no no greater point than it was what you want there.

I agree with that.

So I I just want you guys to know I don't I think this you're not gonna solve a problem by making a detention pond there.

I know you're not contributing that much.

This gentleman's problem is the cities.

Because that burn we're not perceived.

It was never and it was never adequate.

Well, stay on them.

I have a complete pictorial from 90 from 99 all the way up to 2011 when they finally built the two culprits behind there.

It had been an earthen ditch on the Grinnell side, which was totally inadequate.

Uh secondly, uh the the holding pond where it comes into that pipe has had to be replaced twice.

But I understand this is a separate issue from this.

That's right.

And he's gonna help you.

I mean, I I knew Carl Gales did that subdivision up there that you're talking about.

Carl was the engineer or one of them.

Yeah.

So I mean I know Carl.

So the water must be.

You're gonna solve your problem, but you're not gonna fix the issue that we've got here.

That that would make sense that why there's an arch pipe on the northern section of that, because uh the pipe probably came down and then it was open, it was just an open ditch where the water would come through, and then when the pond was put in, then our 24-inch and the uh junction box, and then they added the 24-inch going to the arch pipe.

So it would make sense why they're different size pipes, I mean it will be.

I mean to go through the middle of that church and then what it does, like it just doesn't make sense.

So be sure we define what that is if we're gonna approve it contingent upon what you want and you get what you want so that everybody understands that everybody's got a something that needs to be fixed.

I would the first thing I would do though, I would check that arch pipe, that 36-inch arch pipe going north and south to make sure that there's no stoppage in it.

I mean, it doesn't cost anything, it's just a little bit of time.

But you know, n a lot of times that is normally our problem when when I was working for the city and I'm dealing with the arch pipes, is they collapse, they turn up, and then they get clogged, and of course, then you can't have the drainage going out, so it backs up.

Yeah, that's not R C P and it should have been, but I'm just saying that the city's getting ready to probably find out that there's a big issue.

Yeah, and so a lot of this came up at you know, very end, like I said, you know, in today.

So what really need well and we talked about a little bit last week with the applicants too, and uh trying to get the two engineer our engineering team with their engineering team to really dial down and and figure out you know on what you know because even though he's saying that this are it very well may it may be that problem, but it may not as well.

And what our engineers said, which Matt Meeker's been seeing a long time and had an engineering degree for a long time, he's like, well, let's just just give us some numbers.

Uh you know, what are the numbers off this drainage and the depth of that detention pond and the flow rate going out because you've had a few building additions, but and and then he may be very correct.

There could be a collapse pipe there.

We don't know at this point, but they do want the numbers so that way they can look at.

And we can we could do that.

Oh, you should do that.

At the end of it, you're not gonna have there is catching in the water.

And 28th and 28th Street.

28th Street's coming through there.

It's coming, it's coming back around that way, it's coming back around this way and to the from the south.

Yeah.

So if I can ask a stupid question, because I'm definitely not an engineer, but in the event that the city determines that it's really they're the ones that need to fix it.

Are we accomplishing anything by us having to pay for this study?

If shouldn't we have the city look and say, hey, wait a minute, this is our problem, not yours.

I'll do whatever it is the study will be for your property.

The study's on on your property.

I mean, it's for your property, your detention, your drainage, and where it comes all the way up and to that inlet.

Okay.

Uh and then and and maybe it is, maybe it isn't at this point, but you've had several additions where engineer plans weren't submitted for those additions.

So that's where the question comes up.

When this pond was engineered, has it complied from what I can't remember what you said, 70 beds now to how many beds?

It's up to 100 now.

So you've had a 30 percent increase.

I know we ended up.

So they just want the number.

Maybe the pond's fine and does handle it, and that's why and and if the plan commission would like, and and I know you don't want this, Mike.

I mean, it's an option to table it as well uh until next month.

Uh I mean, you know, or just you know, slow it down.

No, not really not really no.

Yeah.

Not if not, because he said he said there's a that probably sold it out in the past 1550.

Yeah.

So you're gonna find out that you respect that.

Let's don't call the man up and do it at the job.

What's there a restriction on the start to do it, and if he does it, if there's something's got to be done, they've got to fix it, but it's yeah, and that's why we wanted the addition of that second comment.

And and if the let's say the building permit was denied.

So there would have to be another study or some other engineering done, correct?

And then are the neighbors then notified of that process or uh when does the appeal I guess the appeal process starts at some point and the neighbors are notified, is that correct?

You give them an opportunity to if it was denied and they had uh the building permit was denied.

So the the the building permit was denied, they just they couldn't move forward.

So could they re-engineer at that point?

Yes, they they could, and as long as they comply with the city codes, they've moved forward.

Uh you were kind of talking about two different things there.

The appeal process is for the conditional use for the addition.

That that takes place regardless, no matter what.

You approve it, you deny it, it can be appealed to the board of directors.

That's the zoning portion that can be appealed.

Just the zoning portion.

The building permit, once it's approved, you can't appeal a building permit.

I just have one final comment.

I mean, I'm troubled by the you know, public having knowledge and everything, but I agree.

I think what Rod is saying here too, and I agree with that and was gonna say that are we missing the forest for the trees here when really we're just voting on the conditional use.

And then everything kind of gets worked out on the wash and you know, through the city, but our our task here is to vote on the conditional use.

That's right.

And so the point I was trying really to make.

We'll do whatever ultimately needs to be done on our land, but we do feel like this is just adding eight beds to a nursing home to be able to do that.

Well, right.

I mean, my concern is though is still I would hope there would be constant communication with uh of what's happening with the landowners over there.

So all right.

Mr.

Uh Alan, do you have anything else to say?

All of these going back from 99 to 2000 to show how the drainage problems never addressed properly.

And I I grab that like they say the greasy wheel gets in the spoon or whatever.

But what it was, it just kept eroding.

If I could show you these.

This is 2007.

Yeah, and now now that's off site, that's not on the nursing home properties.

Is it not?

Yeah, correct.

It comes through.

And then it also comes down.

That's just that's where it's right.

No, it's a good thing.

Yes, and that's even a lot of things.

It's never been a little bit.

So I could put water for the old transfer.

And I also get the water of South 28.

And the system there is inevitable.

Because I have SQL now, and they have an ability to say.

I I understand.

And uh there is a lot of sympathy and concern for your issue.

I think that's been expressed by the commissioners for sure.

Um that all being said, is there any more comments or questions from the audience?

Uh excuse me, the the or the audience tonight, or the commissioners.

We kind of skipped around a little bit, but at this point I'm gonna ask for a motion to get it on the floor.

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

And also the additional staff comments that we have a motion and a second on the uh staff recommendation, the full stack rec recommendations, I'll say, including the new addition.

And at this point, I will ask then for a roll call vote if there's no other comments or questions.

Let's do it.

Oh no.

Jackson Men and Hall?

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

David Tyler.

Four.

Helly Wilson, four, Rod Holman.

Seven in favor, zero opposed.

All right, uh very good.

We'll move then to items uh four and five, a master land use plan amendment and rezoning at uh sixty-five North 19th Street and 522 North 18th, and 604 North 18th.

Okay, uh thank you, Chair and Master Land Use Plan uh 6726 is a request by Chase and Garrett Architects, agent for Harbor House Foundation and Corporation for the following master landing use plan amendments at the different addresses shown on the screen above.

It'll be from residential detached to mixed use residential at 522 North 18th and 604 North 18th Street, and from residential ATAC to mixed use residential at 605 North 19th and 615 North 19th Street.

Property is currently zoned residential multifamily media or high density RM4 and a planned zoning district ordinance 5123.

I'm gonna go back to that master land use map right there.

The applicant is requesting this master land use plan amendment to facilitate that rezoning request.

Approval of the MLUPA and accompanying rezoning application will facilitate the construction of a transitional dwelling.

The mixed use residential classification that they are requesting is appropriate for the requested planned zoning district and the other zoning designations in place.

Staff does recommend approval subject to planning commission approval of the planned zoning district or request.

Moving on to the zoning application, this is rezoning 10726.

Again, a request by Chase and Garrett Architects, uh agent for Harbor House Foundation Incorporation from the following from residential multifamily high density RM4 to a planned zoning district at 522 North 18th Street and 604 North 18th Street.

From a Planned Zoning District Ordinance 5123 to a Planned Zoning District 605 North 19th Street and at 615 North 19th Street.

Approving of this rezoning facilitates the development of that transitional dwelling for Harbor House at 604 North Eighteenth Street.

You can see it there on the aerial photo right there is 604.

Approval also allows all four of the Harbor House properties within the area to have a consistent zoning.

The PCD in the booklet state that it will exceed the current city requirements in the UDO by requiring 100% high quality materials on all facades for new construction.

And signage will be limited to monument and facade style signage only on the principal campus at 605 and 619 North 19th Street.

No signage will be permitted on the other two properties as shown on the screen.

The property is 604 North 18th Street where the transitional dwelling will be going.

We'll use a rear access driveway.

They're located from the alley.

The project booklet proposes four new spaces to access that uh uh there from the alley.

Again, already mentioned the signage will only be allowed on the main campus and limited to monument and facade or wall signs only, and the PZD is uh requires all construction to have 100% high quality materials during uh new construction.

A neighborhood meeting was held on June 26th uh on site at 5 p.m.

Ten neighboring property owners attend the meeting with questions about the intent and timeline of the proposed development, the number of tenants that will live at the new transitional dwelling, and then two uh of the neighbors at the meeting openly supported the development.

The other neighbors did not uh express direct opposition, but a copy of that neighborhood meeting and the minutes were enclosed in your packet.

The board of directors passed ordinance 5123, the existing PZD ordinance on June 20th of 2023, rezoning the properties at 605-615 North 19th Street from an RM4 to a PZD.

That's at the main campus, and allowing for their existing use as a substance abuse treatment facility to be permitted by right.

The requested PZD includes the two properties located there on North 18th Street to be incorporated into the same PCD as the main campus for Harbor House and will permit the same land use as allowing for an uh expansion of the services for the main campus.

Approval also amends the original PCD and allows for the land use of family support services to be permitted within the land use chart of the plan zoning district booklet and staff does recommend approval.

All right, thank you, Tyler.

Those in favor of this application, please raise your hand.

Anyone opposed here this evening?

Yes, ma'am.

Come on up, state your name and address, please.

Okay.

You bet.

My name is Robin Fowler, and I live at 623 North 20th.

If you look up there, it's a block away from Harbor House.

And I wasn't invited to the other meeting.

I didn't get the letter, but I would have been there.

I'm fully supportive of this, but um the history I've lived there 25 years, and I've seen this neighborhood get really crowded.

Uh and I don't know there's some other things going on there that don't have anything to do with the Harbor House and not this meeting.

But um when we came up to they they expanded the kitchen, which is beautiful, they did a great job, but they took a wall a lot of the parking away.

So my concern is we have more people on the street parking now.

So see this street right here?

That's right there in front of it.

That'll be full of cars all day long.

And the people that live here have no parking.

So they park, they have no place to park.

So my concern is providing parking.

That is not street parking.

Um and another concern I have, which is personal, because um when they came in and fixed all of the you know, this old neighborhood, they fixed all of the drainage.

It was a year I couldn't get out of the neighborhood, and then they built the kitchen.

It was another year I couldn't get out of the neighborhood, and we're having more uh work done.

So my concern is is just it's getting really crowded, and I want to make sure there's room for parking.

I'm not against this thing.

Also, 604 and 522, they have an empty lot next to them.

I'd like to know what this is included in the same building part.

That's I guess that's whoever's to answer that.

Uh they're both I don't know if they're taking both of those spots.

I don't know.

I live, I mean I I I don't know, I can't tell by this plan.

So my concern is to make sure there's enough parking and places for people to put their vehicles that isn't crowding on the streets.

It's a very narrow part of town, anyway.

All right.

Thank you, Ms.

Fowler.

Appreciate that.

Uh would you like to address Kirk uh Du Bois also?

Uh Chase and Garrett with Chase and Garrett Architects, and I have Kurt uh Kirk is it Du Bois uh who uh is with Harbor House and very familiar with how they operate.

Um Kirk, correct me if I'm wrong.

Uh I'm not familiar with a lot of the traffic issues that that would be there on 9th, but I I do understand that there is a lot of activity at uh 700 and 703, which is not associated with Harbor House in any way.

So they seem to kind of get that.

That's a whole nother issue we have to talk about.

Uh I will say that um Mr.

Norris, the director, and Kurt, they've been very concerned about parking.

And um currently there's a fair amount of parking on what it what's underneath 605 there, and the longer term plan is potentially to to create another parking area at 522 for any uh further issues related to parking.

But for the um the facility that we've submitted for permit that would go on 604, uh the parking need would be taken care of in the back off the alley, and then any overflow would fit in 605.

Is that a is that a fairly and the population we work with when they complete residential treatment and then move into our transitional living, the majority of them do not have transportation themselves.

So the increase.

Yeah.

So the in the people that we have that transition from residential to transitional living, the majority of them don't have transportation of their own.

So any increase in traffic or vehicles would be very minimal for the building that we're building.

If you'd like to speak.

Yeah, I I got a question.

I was thought maybe someone would get answered, but one maybe was.

Can you go back to that little diagram?

Can you state your name and address?

Yeah, hi.

My name is Hiller.

Um I live over here at 502.

I know that lady didn't get a letter because a couple of my neighbors didn't get a letter.

And one fine Sunday morning, I got on the printer and I went and met all my neighbors.

We talked about it.

Where do you live?

502 what?

North 17th.

And uh I'm pretty tight with my neighbors like right next to me.

But it was a good opportunity to get around and talk to everybody.

Um did I understand you correctly?

You want to make 522 a parking?

No.

You're gonna tear that building down or what long term uh it potentially could be a parking lot.

All right.

So what are you gonna do with it in the meantime?

Because you're already using it and you already own it, it's already a transitional living, is it not?

Yes.

So you're running it without zoning?

No, I'd like to so there's a big difference between using it for rental so you can rent a house.

It doesn't matter who.

You can't just discriminate on who you rent it to.

No, it's three three three individuals or less, and it's not considered a room a board house or transition.

Now the reason this is transitional.

Three or less, right?

And that's what's the driver right here at the end of the day.

That's 604.

Correct.

Okay.

What about 522?

There's more than three people in there now.

Yes.

That's why we were trying to get it reviews on.

Okay, so that's that's news.

That's that's new to us.

They don't have an existing license for that.

But if this is approved, then they could.

However, the house will still have to comply with all the building and fire codes that that house, and it may not.

So before they would get a license for 522, our fire marshals and building officials that have to make sure it meets all the building and fire codes for the state of Arkansas.

Now look, I'm not down here to throw flies in your soup.

But I do have some concerns.

I've met some of your fellas coming by my home on a Saturday morning or whatever.

The only trouble I ever had was one of them through a cigarette in the backyard.

Damn near caught my yard a fire.

He apologized.

He was good about it.

The rest of them men were good about it.

Here's my real issue.

I can't find a study where this is helping anybody that lives in there.

But I can find a study where it ain't.

So we want to expand something that isn't doing a bit of good and is hurting.

And I don't have any evidence where this is helping anybody.

Not anybody that lives in that neighborhood, and not the men that walk by Sunday morning and say, Good morning, sir.

Yeah, I mean I can definitely get you I can definitely get some information.

I would just like to say we're kind of getting out of the realm of the planning commission scope here.

Appreciate your comments.

Why are we planning for more of what ain't working?

And I understand that.

Um glad you expressed it.

As far as the the validity of the program, that's you know, kind of getting kind of beyond our scope again of what we're to consider.

Okay, but we're gonna approve to plan more of something.

Listen, I'm a big believer in second chance.

I now I under I understand.

I've I've been under zero twice in my life and I've clawed my way back.

Okay.

What I'm getting at is we're gonna approve this zoning to put twelve more beds in there to hurt twelve more people.

Okay.

So let's let's try to bring up the zoning.

Let's let's try to bring this back.

Do we have uh any more comments or questions on the uh master land use plan amendment at this point?

I just want more clarification.

Yes, ma'am, Ms.

Fallon.

I just thank you.

Uh those two there are two houses there, and they've been ha they've been harbor house houses for some time.

I've lived in the neighborhood twenty-five years.

But my c what I want to be clear about is that looks really nice, and I like the what looks, but are they gonna tear those down now?

Are you going to get this one's gonna I'm sorry?

No, no, no, go ahead.

That the one that they're we're proposing is on an empty.

And that's that's the empty line.

That's what we're gonna build in the empty line.

Where is that?

Wait, which one?

That's my house right over there.

Is that right?

No, that's harbor house.

No, no, no.

So that's 605, and then that's the big red brick building.

Okay, so mine's on the other side.

Okay.

Well, I just know that I'm not opposing it.

I just want to make sure that it's gotten clearly crowded.

It's just anyone that might not be for this this planning committee mission, but okay.

Any other issues besides parking?

That's kind of what I've taken from the conversation.

Any other issues by anyone?

Okay.

All right.

So let's do this.

Let me um get a motion on the floor for item for the master land use plan amendment.

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

All right.

Um street park parking is legal on all of these streets, right?

That is correct.

Not on all of them.

Uh the maybe not on the front here on this street, but where they're parking now in front of their main campus, it is.

It's a wide enough street for that.

Matter of fact, all over the city, as long as it's not a classified street, Rogers house or if there's a that were or a no parking sign.

That's incorrect.

I live on North Twentieth Street.

It is illegal to park on my street because it is too narrow.

That's why I have the slanted curves.

That's why I have the wider space between the sidewalk and the street.

If anybody parks on my street, they can be ticketed.

Now, 19th is wider.

So it's it's a misconception that every street has legal parking on it.

Yeah, you can't park on a street near north side, so she said if they have a no parking sign, it's it's illegal.

And so that's what happens.

If if it's not legal parking, our street department will put a sign up and then they can be ticketed.

That's also not necessarily correct either.

I I've lived in that neighborhood 25 years.

I have not I do not have a no parking sign on my street, and you cannot park on my street.

You have to park off the street.

And I don't know about 18.

18th.

17th is that way too.

You can park on one side, but you can't park on the other.

Yeah.

Is it legal?

It may be it may be legal.

It's not on that street and that one.

Yes.

Yes, on this photo right here, is legal to park on that street.

But you can't park on that street that that thing is on.

You can't park on that street.

You can park on this street.

See how wide that green is.

You have to pull off the street.

Whatever that business is.

So I think I think we have some confusion there.

When you say street, I I think of right away.

You are correct.

They can park in that grass right there perfectly fine.

And the police may ask them to scoot over, but a street is actually the right way.

A lot of people think of the street as just the asphalt curved to curve, streets wider, and that's all the way, including the sidewalks.

The sidewalks are actually part of the street.

So uh, but yes, if there's no parking signs there, they can't.

So if that answered your question, Kelly.

Okay, we have a motion on the floor.

I'm gonna ask no other comments.

I'm gonna ask for a vote on item four, the master land use plan amendment.

Rod Cullman.

Well, what uh what about the issue of 522?

Uh yeah, the vote's been called.

We're taking one out of time.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

Jackson Mendenhall?

Sean McCaffrey?

Four.

Vicky Newton?

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Seven in favor, zero opposed.

Okay.

Now we're going to move to item five, the rezoning.

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

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

All right.

Any other additional comments or concerns that want to be brought up regarding the rezoning part of this application?

The way it sounds, it sounds like maybe they're doing their there's more people in it today on 522, but this rezoning is going to mitigate that problem.

They're probably having might be overcrowded on 522.

Maybe you're there's somebody in there right now, maybe there's not.

It might be three occupants, because I think that's the rule.

Um, but I think they're getting this rezoning to your comment.

I think they're they're getting this rezoning, so they can have additional housing.

So they're they're going through the correct steps to do what they're to do the right thing that their business is supposed to do in order to comply with with what the city needs.

Now you guys have parking issues.

Uh no, I get it.

Um, but I think that they're they're gonna they're gonna build a pretty decent product over there.

And if there's if some of it has to turn into parking, I think that's probably good for that area.

You know, you guys are already saying it's overcrowded if you've got to add some parking spaces.

Maybe you do that in the future.

But the product that they're showing us here, the kind of the development plan that we have to go by is what they're presenting and what we're being presented.

And it looks great.

I mean, I think it's gonna look good.

I think if you guys build that thing, it's gonna look incredible over there.

Um I hope it continues to be good work, and I hope it is for your community area too.

You know, yeah.

So um my motion is to approve.

I I think that we've talked we've kind of talked about all the zoning the best we can.

I mean, they've they've talked about it as much as we need to know, but a lot of those issues may be just with you and the business and trying to figure out how they operate.

Um but I think we re- I think we we approved this.

I don't I don't see any reason not to.

So it's it goes it goes right along with what they're trying to get done.

They're gonna build a nice product right there.

Okay, so we have a motion and a second, I believe, and I'm gonna ask for a vote.

Jackson Mendenhall?

Sean McCaffrey?

Four.

Vicky Newton?

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Kelly Wilson, four, Rod Coleman.

Griffin Hannah?

Four.

Seven in favor, zero opposed.

Okay, again, appreciate everyone's comments on these issues.

All right.

Um our next item is uh item six development plan at uh 7909 and 8001 Veterans Avenue, Mr.

Kylan.

Okay, thank you.

Uh development plan 12726, a request by Blue Rock Design Agent for Veterans Flex FSM LLC for a contractor's office and storage yard and industrial light zone at 7909 and 8001 Veterans Avenue.

Approval of the development plan allows the property to be renovated into a contractor's office and storage yard.

The subject property is on the east side of Veterans Avenue and uh Kay Hill Place intersection.

Uh the track contains an area of 2.08 acres with 374 feet of uh frontage along Veterans Avenue.

Some of the site features, a uh 25 foot ingress and egress uh easement uh uh exists uh an existing curb onto the Veterans Avenue uh that will be utilized and shared with the adjacent property to the north.

Uh no additional access to or from the uh Veterans Avenue is proposed.

Uh one internal drive aisle uh will serve the development.

Um the architectural features, the building facade will include uh four arched uh shingled uh portico roofs uh supported by a wood and brick columns as a well as well as an addition to a brick wainscot on the front facade of the existing metal building.

Uh the proposed development uh will have uh contractor's offices and interior storage space totaling an area of 9,375 square feet that is approximately uh 23 feet in height.

Uh the site will also retain an existing uh 1,816 uh square foot office building.

Uh there was a neighborhood in the meeting that was held on June the 30th, uh, 2026 at 5 p.m.

Uh on site.

There were no neighboring property owners in attendance.

Uh on the staff comment uh on February 4, 2025, uh the Board of Directors approved rezoning ordinance 1525 uh from not zoned to industrial light.

Uh the zone change uh was contingent upon construction complying with the companion development uh for the office contractor shop and storage yard and mini storage warehouse facility non-climatized.

Uh the applicant has since omitted the mini storage warehouse and now proposes a contractor's office and storage yard uh with this similar architectural style.

Uh the changes exceed the allowed changes in the uh section uh 27307 of the UDO and must receive development uh plan approval for the requested changes.

Uh staff recommends approval continuing on the following.

Uh the construction must comply with the submitted development plan.

Changes with the submitted development plans are permitted, although limited to those described in section 27307 uh to the UDO.

Any changes greater than those described in the section will require Planning Commission approval.

Uh second, uh all future uh outdoor storage yards shall be completely screened uh from the right-of-way and the adjacent properties.

Uh in addition, a temporary revocable license must be obtained for the proposed landscaping within the 20-foot uh sanitary sewer easement.

Uh the next one, all site lighting shall comply with section uh 276025 of the UDO.

Uh all required landscaping must be irrigated uh with an automatic uh system and uh all signage shall be uh limited to monument signs or wall-mounted signs.

And that concludes my report.

Any questions?

All right, thank you.

Uh there are those in favor of the application.

Anyone opposed on this one?

All right.

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

Motion approved with staff comments.

Second.

Any other comments or questions?

Commissioners.

All right.

All right.

All right.

Um that case uh asked for a vote on item six development plan.

Kelly Wilson for Rod Coleman.

Griffin Hannah?

Four.

Jackson Mendonol.

Abstain.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Vicky Newton.

Four.

David Tyler.

Four.

Six in favor, one abstention.

Commissioner Mendenhall.

Okay, I'm gonna recess the planning commission and convene the board of zoning adjustment for a this variance item on uh Greenwood Road, the old Greenwood Road.

The applicant has asked for their application to be withdrawn, so we just simply need to vote on that.

So I'd ask for a motion on for with for the withdrawal of the variance.

Motion to withdraw.

Second.

All right, I'll ask for a vote.

David Tyler.

For withdrawing.

The motion is to withdraw.

I'm against their what they have.

No, you wouldn't be for it.

The motion is to withdraw it for the withdrawal.

I agree to withdraw.

Yes.

You can do it.

Your four.

I'm with you.

Okay.

Kelly Wilson, four.

Rod Coleman.

Four.

Griffin Hannah.

Four.

Jackson Mendonhal.

Four.

Sean McCaffrey.

Four.

Vicky Newton?

Four.

Six and seven in favor, zero opposed.

Okay.

I'll reassess the Board of Zoning Adjustment.

Convene the Planning Commission for the development portion of this.

Again, for a I'll ask for a motion.

Get on the floor for withdrawal.

Motion withdrawal.

Second.

So to be clear, you're uh making a motion uh to approve the applicant's request to withdraw.

Yes.

All right.

We have a motion and a second.

I'll ask for a roll call vote.

On item eight.

Vicki Newton.

Four.

David Tyler?

Four.

Kelly Wilson?

Four.

Rod Coleman?

Four.

Griffin Hannah?

Four.

Jackson Mendenhall?

Four.

Sean McCaffrey?

Four.

Seven in favor, zero opposed.

All right.

So we're down to our last two items.

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

We have a variance and then also a development plan for the planning commission.

Thank you, Chairman.

Variance 21726 is requested by WDD Architects, Agent for Superior Properties 3, LLC from Section 276024, the required mechanical equipment screening in an industrial light zone at 7101, 7103, 7105, and 7107, South Zero Street.

I will also be presenting development plan 11726, a request by the uh same agent for the same property for a building addition to an industrial uh commercial uh machinery equipment and rental building.

The variance portion of this request and companion development plan will facilitate facilitate the construction of a new paint booth inside an existing building and the vent stack without the required screening.

So the variance is that vent stack you see on the screen there, about six foot tall or so uh on an existing metal building.

The applicant uh stated in their hardship for the variance, so the existing structure is already a metal facade and it and it matches or uh all of the adjacent buildings and the vent stack would uh be painted to match this existing building.

In August of 2018, the primary building on on the campus, they're exceeded a 50% increase in the building size requiring the development to comply with the UDO design guidelines, hence the landscaping and the high quality materials you see on the screen.

This the new development installed at that time uh uh brought that building up to code.

The site currently has several legal nonconforming accessory buildings for or so that are constructed with 100% metal wall panels.

The legal non-conforming section 2711 83A allows for the continued use of a nonconforming structure until destroyed or damaged.

Section 271183C states that non-conforming structure may be remodeled or enlarged within the bulk and area regulations of that zoning district, which is located, provided such remodeling and or enlarging does not increase any existing zoning violations.

Section 276024C states exhaust fans located on the building facades not visible from a street right away may match the permanent color of the surface from which they are uh from which they project.

However, the proposed exhaust fan is visible from South Zero Street.

In staff's opinion, the exhaust vent pipe would have would prove difficult screen.

Staff also believes the applicant may utilize softening techniques such as the painting to match the exterior color of the building.

The applicant has proposed to paint the vent stack to match the building.

Staff does recommend approval of the variance uh subject to construction compliance mid development plan.

Uh any changes must receive uh planning commission approval any changes rarely those in section 27307.

And the exhaust uh bent stack pipe must be the same color of the exterior facade of the building.

Again, this uh is all driven from the existing building is nine thousand seven hundred and eighty-three square foot.

On the previous slides there, you've seen they're gonna take that building and do an interior paint booth to paint their rental equipment fleet, the booms, the tractors, and in that.

And staff does recommend approval with those same two comments that were on the variance request.

All right, uh those in favor of the application.

Anyone opposed?

All right.

All right, uh I'll ask for a motion for the uh variants item nine.

So moved.

Motion to approve.

Second.

All right.

Any other discussion?

We had a lot of discussion on the uh on the screening, so um, but I think it's a good compromise.

So um I'll ask for a roll call vote on item nine.

two comments that were on the variance requests all right uh those in favor of the application anyone opposed all right all right uh I'll ask for a motion for the uh variance item not so moved motion to approve second all right any other discussion we had a lot of discussion on the uh on the screening so um but I think it's a good compromise so um I'll ask for a roll call vote on item nine Vicky Newton four David Tyler four Kelly Wilson four rod Coleman four Griffin Hannah four Jackson Mendenhall four Sean McCaffrey four seven in favor zero opposed okay I'll recess the board of zoning adjustment conveying the convene the planning commission item ten the development plan as for a motion I make a motion to approve the staff comments second any other comments questions not as for a roll call vote Sean McCaffrey four Vicky Newton four David Tyler Kelly Wilson for Rod Coleman Griffin Hannah for Jackson Mendenhall four seven in favor zero opposed I'll ask for a motion to adjourn and see you next month