County panel eyes planning rules

BENTONVILLE — Benton County justices of the peace on Thursday debated whether they want to take back the task of hearing planning appeals.

The Legislative Committee discussed changes in the planning regulations, including abolishing the Appeals Board and returning to past practice of having a panel of justices of the peace hear appeals of a Planning Board’s decision. No changes to the appeals process were approved by the committee. Changes approved by the committee go to the Committee of the Whole.

“That’s what we were elected to do, to represent those people and do what’s right for the citizens” Pat Adams, justice of the peace for District 6, said of the justices of the peace hearing appeals. “I have enough confidence in myself to make the right decision.”

The committee also discussed changes in the planning ordinance to give residents more opportunity to appeal planning decisions. George Spence, county attorney, said the Appeals Board’s current interpretation of the ordinance gives the right to appeal only to those making applications to the county, not to neighbors or nearby property owners.

“As it is, they’re only recourse is to go out and hire an attorney,” Bob Bland, justice of the peace for District 12, said during the debate. “These are folks who probably don’t have an extra $5,000 so they just have to accept it.”

The county established the Appeals Board when the ordinance establishing planning regulations was amended in 2014. The seven-member board is made up, if possible, of one justice of the peace; with the other six members being attorneys, architects, engineers, and people with experience in planning or construction and development. The Appeals Board is appointed by the county judge and members serve two-year terms. Another proposed change being considered gives the Appeals Board members four-year terms.

Joel Edwards, justice of the peace for District 15, said the county has established planning regulations and any Appeals Board has to follow those rules. Most appeals

will be asking to overturn a decision approved by the Planning Board.

“In reality, the only thing that’s going to make these people happy is if we say ‘You can’t build that.’” Edwards said. “They don’t want it in their backyard.”

Josh Bryant, justice of the peace for District 2, said the county should consider revising the compatibility matrix now included in the planning ordinance. The matrix identifies “incompatible” uses in red. The language of the ordinance allows for incompatible uses is the developer agrees to requirements set by the Planning Board to mitigate problems with noise, light,

“In reality, the only thing that’s going to make these people happy is if we say ‘You can’t build that. They don’t want it in their backyard.” — Joel Edwards, justice of the peace for District 15

traffic and other conflicts. between the proposed use and adjoining properties.

“I think we’re giving them false hope,” Bryant said. “They see that red and think that’s it, it’s not going to be allowed.”