OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

2026-02-17 City Council Meeting Summary

Meeting PortalTuesday, February 17, 2026
BodyJonesboro, Arkansas
SessionMeeting Portal
DateTuesday, February 17, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

All right.

0:00

130.

0:08

Gilmore?

0:09

Here.

0:09

Miles.

0:10

Here.

0:10

Miller.

0:11

Here.

0:12

Billy.

0:12

Here.

0:14

Here.

0:16

All right.

0:17

Need a motion to approve minutes from 120.

0:20

So move.

0:21

Second.

0:22

Thank you.

0:22

All those in favor say aye.

0:24

Aye.

0:25

All right.

0:25

Number one.

0:27

Um, I'm not gonna pronounce the name, but um Ridia.

0:34

You're representing them.

0:35

Yeah.

0:36

Won't you step right up and tell us what's going on?

0:38

I'm not gonna try to pronounce your first name, but it's Ramadani is the last one.

0:42

Okay, thank you.

0:43

But I'm John Easley with Associated Engineering.

0:46

We've done side plans for uh commercial development hill park drive.

0:50

One of the comments was the traffic access code requires stub outs on new parking lots to adjacent properties.

0:58

Situation here on the east side is the Goddard School.

1:01

That's where their playground is.

1:04

On the west side is Stewart Orthodonis, existing dental office parking lot already in business and everything.

1:12

And we're asking for a variance to not put the stub outs in.

1:18

Um what's gonna be the uh the purpose of this building, or do you know yet?

1:25

Sorry, the building that you're that she's building, or or he whoever's building, um what's what is it gonna be used for?

1:33

Uh it's uh four rent beauty salon, I guess you could call it little individual stalls or stations, I guess you call them.

1:42

Okay, all right.

1:47

If y'all could look at y'all, I know I'm sure y'all looked at the plot plan.

1:53

And you if you looked on Google Maps, you could see clearly the Goddard playground on one side, and then the other side is orthodontics office.

2:05

Stuart orthodontics uh gentleman here is from the okay.

2:10

You ready to give up five to seven parking places?

2:13

I prefer not to.

2:14

I would agree with that.

2:17

Um did you do that?

2:20

Did you do his building?

2:21

The dentist?

2:22

No, you didn't seventeen fifty one so so just looking at the flat plan.

2:49

So if you skip a lot, 1731, and you go over to whatever address that is plan view to the west, they've got their turnout in place for cross access to come through.

3:03

Darrell, am I reading it looking correctly?

3:06

Mayfield drive.

3:10

Is that is that current?

3:11

That's just the end of their end of their drive.

3:14

It didn't, it doesn't like it's turned back, is it?

3:17

I'm I'm trying to oh the one on Mayfield?

3:21

Yes, sir.

3:21

What I'm trying to what I'm trying to form an opinion of an observation of is that the one on the side is the the one on the left side of of this project.

3:37

I can understand not wanting to Goddard school, but the left side is that not is that not to 1731?

3:46

Am I reading this correctly?

3:48

We're at 17.

3:49

This proposal is 1751, 1731.

3:52

Is is it on a vacant lot?

3:55

No, that's where Stuart Orthodonist is.

3:57

Okay, so on this picture it is show it appears to be more than oh so okay, so that's where your building is at.

4:05

Okay.

4:09

Okay.

4:10

Then I have never mind.

4:12

So I've did he get a variance on his line.

4:23

I guess so.

4:24

My question as well is is Stewart's doesn't have turn back or cross access turnbacks on theirs.

4:31

Not on the adjacent line.

4:37

Oh, okay.

4:41

Yeah.

4:42

All the way to Mayfield.

4:51

It's in on Park Hill.

4:52

Yeah.

4:53

And there's an ingress egress on Mayfield.

5:00

Mr.

5:00

Darrell, do you the city doesn't have a comment either way on this?

5:06

This is such low traffic count out there that I mean if the traffic count was higher, it it'd be one thing, but there's you know maybe a couple hundred a day on this street.

5:20

So that elevation is that date here in there.

5:50

Yeah, that's that water doesn't even have a parking in the bay on that side.

5:54

So there's no way to even attach there, yeah.

5:56

Yeah.

6:04

Mr.

6:04

Chair, I'd move that we grant the variance as applied for second.

6:11

Okay, roll call please.

6:13

Yes.

6:14

Yes.

6:15

Yes.

6:16

Yes.

6:18

Okay, you're on this one too, West and Tess.

6:20

Thank you.

6:21

Okay, go.

6:29

Wagner's up next.

6:30

Wagner, Mr.

6:31

Wagner.

6:31

Yeah.

6:32

In uh uh meter drive.

6:35

Yes.

6:36

Rescue for a five foot variance on the north side and the west side.

6:41

The current zoning allows single family and duplexes to have the driveways five foot off the property lines.

6:48

He wants to put a triplex up, which throws it into commercial, which is 20 foot.

6:53

We're just asking for the driveways to be five foot off the property lines on the north and west side.

7:02

It keeps the driveway further away from the intersection.

7:05

Intersection.

7:06

Okay.

7:21

Wagner's breaking his uh string of building single family homes.

7:29

Talking about that.

7:35

Obviously, this is rated for triplex.

7:38

Triplex, yeah.

7:45

Um it does put it further away from the intersection, which is a good thing, but um I mean I don't know if we really have a have much of my opinion on it since it's just that driveway there.

7:59

It um he's got the building setting on there, it it if you put it at twenty feet, it's gonna make it kind of a hard turn getting in and around the buildings.

8:16

The traffic will enter on meter drive around the back of the building and come out, be like a one-way street, one-way driveway.

8:24

It'll come out on Fairfield, middle field.

8:27

It's actually gonna go the drive, it's gonna go behind the yeah, it'll in or off meter angle parking and then come around the north side of the building and come out on Fairfield.

8:39

I got a question.

8:40

Uh on this uh request it says five feet or less.

8:46

Is that what we're I wouldn't go any less?

8:49

No, we're not going less, right?

8:50

Okay, just five feet.

8:51

I just reading his uh yeah, well, no, it doesn't need to be any less than five feet.

8:55

Does that affect the sidewalk?

8:59

It'll be required to put sidewalks in, so he'll do the sidewalk, whatever there's pipe in the ditch and all that and everything else.

9:10

Have you done like a preliminary site layout on that property?

9:13

The the buildings want to put on.

9:14

I've got one.

9:15

I walked off for God's out.

9:17

Okay.

9:18

That's what I was looking for.

9:20

I got you.

9:24

Now on Metter, I believe the old house that was there before come off there.

9:32

Is that in the trees to the to the west, if you will, you know, Metter?

9:37

Yeah.

9:45

John, is there a reason why he's pushing for a triplex there?

9:49

I mean, I realize it's more revenue, but why why is he pushing the limits of trying to put a triplex building in there?

10:00

He couldn't put a four-plex there.

10:02

I mean, I don't I'm an engineer and not a developer.

10:08

A triplex fit good.

10:10

I mean it fits good on the lot.

10:12

It fits in the with setbacks and everything else.

10:15

Now why are you going for a triplex and not a single?

10:18

Uh nice five.

10:20

I can't answer that.

10:29

It's the property line of 3404 between that property and 3404.

10:32

Is that correct?

10:34

That's what he's wanting to reduce by 15 feet.

10:37

Yeah, the property is 3404 meter drive.

10:40

Okay.

10:43

I believe that's right.

10:52

3406 meter drive was was the original address.

11:02

Can you go back to the Google Earth plan?

11:04

I'm just got confused.

11:16

We are talking about the corner lot.

11:18

Right.

11:19

The corner lot.

11:20

Corner lot.

11:20

Okay.

11:20

Okay.

11:21

Never mind.

11:21

Okay.

11:21

Baking corner lot, yeah.

11:29

Okay.

11:33

And and to Matt's point, we don't want the verbiage to say five foot or less.

11:38

We want it to say five foot.

11:44

Yeah, typically for the single family of the driveways are you know five foot off the line.

11:50

I grew up three or four blocks away from here.

11:52

So they're all like one side, five foot off the property line.

11:57

Sometimes you got them outside the lot or the same going down the street.

12:04

I grew up out there too, John.

12:06

It ain't what it used to be.

12:07

No, it's not.

12:21

Nothing else from the city, Darrell.

12:24

Okay.

12:27

Chairman, I move we uh grant the variance.

12:30

Second?

12:31

Second.

12:32

All right.

12:34

Yes.

12:35

Yes.

12:35

Billy.

12:38

Do we need correct the verbiage?

12:40

So we have five foot.

12:42

Minimum of five foot.

12:44

Minimum.

12:44

Yeah.

12:44

Minimum five foot.

12:46

Yeah.

12:46

Minimum of five.

12:47

Yes.

12:48

Just five foot from the property line.

12:51

You mean your motion that way?

12:53

I will amend my motion that way.

13:00

Yes.

13:02

Campus?

13:03

Yes.

13:08

Everybody voted good.

13:10

Sleeping there.

13:11

All right.

13:11

Thank you.

13:12

Thank you.

13:13

Thanks, John.

13:14

Donna Franklin.

13:16

Come on up here.

13:20

How are you guys doing?

13:22

Good.

13:23

Good.

13:24

I'm my name's Trevor Mats.

13:25

I'm here on behalf of Jed On General Contracting.

13:28

We are requesting a variance to increase the uh a fence that we want to put on our lot from a six-foot high to eight foot high.

13:35

And the sole purpose of it is to conceal all of our construction trailers that we have around our lots.

13:41

Right now they're right across the road from us.

13:44

So we want to bring them closer to the building, conceal them, and keep them away from the public.

14:21

Tell them what you think about eight foot fences.

14:27

How many times?

14:29

Well, no, obviously.

14:31

I'm just talking about eight foot fences.

14:33

I don't yeah.

14:35

Yeah, thanks.

14:36

Um be known for something.

14:38

I get I my only question would would a six-foot fence not accomplish the same thing for you?

14:45

It makes it harder for individuals to climb over and it conceals them more efficiently with these being taller cargo trailers, it would hide them a lot better.

14:53

Yeah.

14:54

Um just so I make sure the ordinance.

15:00

A fence can be six foot tall, but then you can put bob wire across the top that extends past six foot.

15:03

Is that right or is that wrong?

15:04

I don't think we allow a razor wire or bar in the city.

15:08

Do we not?

15:09

Uh you do in some industrial areas, but uh not not here.

15:13

Not here.

15:18

Yeah, this would only be a chain link fence, so no bar wire on top of this one.

15:27

So my question is, is as as we try to weigh each one of these variances when they come forward.

15:34

What is the the hardship of what is your hardship for us to to grant a variance?

15:40

One of the criteria for us to to grant variances is there's there's a a hardship.

15:46

So besides you guys just wanting, and by the way, I've what y'all have done down there in your office complex and revitalizing that I think is great.

15:55

Thank you, sir.

15:57

But what is what is the hardship other than y'all just want to go to eight foot?

16:02

No, I got two things for you.

16:04

So the first one being public safety.

16:05

Right now there's a lot of kids that run around the property and uh and uh there's houses that butt up against it, and they're always trying to climb up and on and around these trailers currently.

16:14

Okay, second thing is um prevention of theft.

16:17

Because these are trailers that are full of thousands of dollars of construction materials.

16:21

So this will obviously, you know, help protect against that.

16:25

Okay.

16:26

And have the eye sore.

16:28

Yeah.

16:29

And have the eyesore.

16:35

So if it's chain linked, are you gonna have like slats in it or something?

16:38

So you can't see a windscreen black windscreen, yes, sir.

16:45

You said you had a picture of this.

16:56

I mean it.

16:57

It looks good.

16:58

Or you've got this drawing is where you want to put that fence.

17:03

The heavy black line.

17:04

Yes.

17:04

The fire department's always already signed off on it.

17:06

The fire I do that's out of the way.

17:08

There's a fire exit right there, it's out of the way.

17:10

They're both outside of the fence.

17:12

They've already signed off on it, it's just that area right there.

17:26

Yeah, it's coming in the arcade.

17:30

That area right there.

17:39

Okay.

17:44

What is it that you're actually wearing the perimeter of the fence?

17:47

Is that on here somewhere?

17:48

Yes, sir.

17:52

Yeah.

17:53

No, not the one you had.

17:58

Yes, where's the wrong there?

17:59

Oh, here's your fence.

18:00

Yeah, the white line.

18:01

Oh, okay.

18:02

Okay.

18:04

Okay.

18:07

Where is that on?

18:09

That's gonna be those four base here right now.

18:20

Tear all this up there.

18:22

They're gonna tear all this out.

18:26

Yeah.

18:31

This is carbon too.

18:32

Mother looking, Darrell, what district is this fall in?

18:35

Is this the downtown improvement district?

18:37

Or is it industrial arts?

18:40

Industrial arts, okay.

19:06

That's not a street right there, is it?

19:08

It's just a your driveway or just driveway.

19:14

You're talking about that runs right alongside the long ways.

19:16

Yeah, it's just a driveway, I believe.

19:18

Yes, sir.

19:29

This this lot borders the McClure side?

19:32

Yes.

19:39

How are you planning on attaching the black fabric?

19:43

Uh it'll be like with some a uh um construction brackets, some simple kind of brackets or some steel zip ties, I don't uh things such as that.

20:35

So just so I'm clear, are you planning?

20:38

Are you asking to bring it along Burke, or is it does it go down McClure and then cross over and then turn back at the corner of your building?

20:51

Yes, it just goes right along there.

20:53

What about out here?

20:55

Okay, okay, does not for true down over now.

20:57

Okay, that's the exact proposal layout.

20:59

Okay, yes, sir.

21:01

So it does turn back and then lines up with the corner of your building.

21:06

Yes, okay, exactly.

21:08

You got a twenty I see now you have twenty uh twenty-foot gates in there.

21:36

Go ahead, Casey.

21:39

Well, uh so I I was trying to go back to your point about hardships.

21:42

Unfortunately, the six foot height is a hardship we all have.

21:45

Yep, correct.

21:46

It it really is.

21:47

We all bear it because that's the code we've got.

21:51

Um I haven't been prone to to go along with taller fences than that.

22:00

Um I just I haven't, and most of them have been on wood fences and residential neighborhoods, so this one's a little different.

22:06

You're in a commercial type setting.

22:09

Um, but I I'm still having a little bit of a hard time, like Kevin said, uh, with the hardship of it.

22:16

Uh, because it like I said, the hardships you gave, which are credible, don't get me wrong.

22:20

I I agree with you.

22:23

Um they're just all hardships that we all bear.

22:26

And so that there's my issue with it.

22:28

That's all the that's what I have.

22:30

Okay.

22:36

But the building does look great.

22:37

Thank you.

22:38

My office is down here.

22:39

It really looks great.

22:40

It does.

22:40

It does done a good job.

22:42

A big improvement.

22:43

Yes, huge.

22:43

Yes, sir.

22:44

Thank you.

22:45

And we're proud of it.

22:46

You could keep going.

22:48

Yeah.

22:53

Clean a lot of that crap up.

22:54

Yeah.

22:55

I put some before and after pictures in the little uh packet just because it does look a lot better.

23:00

I appreciate that.

23:04

And with that being said, with the rest of the buildings along uh Burke.

23:15

That eight-foot fence is gonna be minor.

23:19

It's just not gonna be a thing, in my humble opinion, sometimes not humble, but I just I don't see a problem with that.

23:29

Now, what I do have a problem is you saw I have seen how these black um wraps start fraying in the wind and get neglected.

23:40

I don't think you're gonna let that happen.

23:42

No, we're very mindful of spent on that.

23:44

We're very mindful of that, yes, sir.

23:46

Yeah.

23:46

I don't know if y'all know what we do, but we primarily remodel Walmarts, and they are some of the most particular people on the planet.

23:52

We're very accustomed to you know, make making sure all of our buttons are are you know buttoned up and whatnot?

24:01

I'll let you uh enter interview some of my clients.

24:05

I would I would disagree with you, Mr.

24:22

Chair.

24:22

I'd move that we uh place the variance request on the floor for vote, please.

24:28

Second, second.

24:29

All right.

24:31

Most yes.

24:36

Me load.

24:37

Yes, Billy.

24:40

Yes.

24:41

Get both.

24:42

No.

24:45

You good with three votes?

24:46

You got three.

24:47

Okay, good.

24:47

All right, thank y'all.

24:48

All right, proceed.

24:49

Thank y'all very much.

24:51

Thank you.

24:52

You guys want these drawings back right here?

24:54

That beautiful building.

24:55

You need to pass it out to everybody.

24:57

All right, thank you.

25:00

Sir.

25:01

No sir.

25:01

We're adjourned.

25:02

What's your rogers?

25:03

Second weekend.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████████████████████████████████████████80%
Public Safety██████11%
Procedural█████9%
Summary of Proceedings

2026-02-17 City Council Meeting Summary

The February 17, 2026, City Council meeting convened to address the approval of meeting minutes and consider four variance requests related to commercial development, driveway setbacks, and fencing height. The council reviewed proposals involving traffic access, residential density, and construction site aesthetics, deliberating on specific hardships and zoning implications before rendering votes on each item.

Consent Calendar

  • The council unanimously moved to approve and adopted the minutes from the previous meeting.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • John Easley (Associated Engineering): Acting on behalf of the applicant for a commercial development on Hill Park Drive, Easley requested a variance to waive the requirement for stub-outs to adjacent parking lots. He noted the site is flanked by the Goddard School playground (east) and an existing Stewart Orthodontics office (west). The proposed use is a building with four individual beauty salon stalls.
  • West Side Property Owner (Stewart Orthodontics): Expressed a preference to avoid giving up five to seven parking spaces should stub-outs be required. He noted his existing lot does not currently have turnbacks on the adjacent line, though it has access on Mayfield Drive.
  • Kevin (City Engineer): Stated the city has no formal comment, noting the low traffic volume (a few hundred vehicles per day) on the street and the lack of bay parking on the water side, making attachment impossible.
  • Council Member Wagner: Questioned the applicant's motivation for pursuing a triplex instead of a single-family home, noting the revenue potential. He expressed concern that the driveway design would require a sharp turn and function as a one-way driveway entering from Meter Drive and exiting onto Fairfield/Middlefield.
  • Council Member: Expressed support for the concept of placing the driveway further from the intersection but raised a concern regarding the verbiage of the variance to ensure it specifies a minimum of five feet rather than "five feet or less" to protect sidewalk requirements.
  • Trevor Mats (Jed O'neal General Contracting): Requested a variance to increase a fence height from six feet to eight feet. The stated purpose is to conceal construction trailers and materials, citing public safety (preventing children from climbing) and theft prevention as hardships. He clarified the fence would be chain-link with black windscreens and has received fire department approval for exits.
  • Council Member: Expressed skepticism regarding the claimed "hardship," noting that while the safety concerns are credible, they are burdens shared by all property owners under the current code. He also expressed concern about the potential for black windscreens to fraying and becoming neglected over time.
  • Council Member: Disagreed with the notion that the eight-foot fence is a problem, noting that other buildings on Burke have similar heights. He emphasized the need for the applicant to maintain the windscreens.

Discussion Items

  • Variance 1: Traffic Access Stub-outs (1751 Hill Park Drive)
    • Discussion focused on whether the Goddard School playground and existing orthodontic offices would provide sufficient cross-access alternatives.
    • The City Engineer noted the low traffic count reduces the necessity for stub-outs in this specific low-traffic area.
  • Variance 2: Driveway Setbacks (3406 Meter Drive)
    • The applicant seeks a variance to allow driveways to be five feet from property lines instead of the standard 20 feet required for commercial zones (triplex classification).
    • The council discussed the site layout, noting the driveway's impact on the intersection and the requirement for new sidewalks.
    • A verbal amendment was made to the motion to clarify the distance as "a minimum of five feet."
  • Variance 3: Fence Height Increase (Industrial Arts District)
    • The council deliberated on the definition of "hardship" required for variance approval. The applicant argued that current six-foot fences present safety and security risks for construction sites.
    • Concerns were raised regarding the visual impact and maintenance of black windscreens on chain-link fences.
    • The applicant confirmed the fence runs along the lot perimeter, includes the building corner, and utilizes construction brackets or zip ties for the screens.

Key Outcomes

  • Variance 1 (Hill Park Drive): Granted unanimously. The council moved to grant the variance to waive the stub-out requirement as applied for.
  • Variance 2 (Meter Drive): Granted unanimously with amended verbiage. The motion was modified to grant a variance for a driveway setback of "minimum five feet" from the property line.
  • Variance 3 (Fence Height): Denied. The council voted 3 to 1 against the request. The applicant was instructed to proceed with the variance request for a vote, but the majority determined the hardship criteria were not sufficiently met to override the ordinance, despite the applicant's arguments regarding safety and aesthetics.
  • Adjournment: The meeting was concluded after the final decisions were rendered.

Meeting Transcript

All right. 130. Gilmore? Here. Miles. Here. Miller. Here. Billy. Here. Here. All right. Need a motion to approve minutes from 120. So move. Second. Thank you. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All right. Number one. Um, I'm not gonna pronounce the name, but um Ridia. You're representing them. Yeah. Won't you step right up and tell us what's going on? I'm not gonna try to pronounce your first name, but it's Ramadani is the last one. Okay, thank you. But I'm John Easley with Associated Engineering. We've done side plans for uh commercial development hill park drive. One of the comments was the traffic access code requires stub outs on new parking lots to adjacent properties. Situation here on the east side is the Goddard School. That's where their playground is. On the west side is Stewart Orthodonis, existing dental office parking lot already in business and everything. And we're asking for a variance to not put the stub outs in. Um what's gonna be the uh the purpose of this building, or do you know yet? Sorry, the building that you're that she's building, or or he whoever's building, um what's what is it gonna be used for? Uh it's uh four rent beauty salon, I guess you could call it little individual stalls or stations, I guess you call them. Okay, all right. If y'all could look at y'all, I know I'm sure y'all looked at the plot plan. And you if you looked on Google Maps, you could see clearly the Goddard playground on one side, and then the other side is orthodontics office. Stuart orthodontics uh gentleman here is from the okay. You ready to give up five to seven parking places? I prefer not to. I would agree with that. Um did you do that? Did you do his building? The dentist? No, you didn't seventeen fifty one so so just looking at the flat plan. So if you skip a lot, 1731, and you go over to whatever address that is plan view to the west, they've got their turnout in place for cross access to come through. Darrell, am I reading it looking correctly? Mayfield drive.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com