Planning board rejects Roth preliminary plat for Oaktree Estates amid road, safety and infrastructure concerns

The Benton County Planning Board voted down a preliminary plat for a 29-lot subdivision called Oaktree Estates, proposed by developer Randy Roth, after residents and some board members said local roads and emergency access are inadequate for new subdivision traffic.

Braden Wise of Bates & Associates presented the proposal for a 30‑lot preliminary plat (29 buildable lots and a detention/common lot) on Old Springtown Road near Gentry and Springtown, saying the development would rely on City of Gentry for water and individual septic systems for wastewater. Wise told the board the applicant provided a revised plat and a service-confirmation letter from Gentry Water and that the planned lots meet the county’s dimensional requirements.

The nut of the opposition was public-safety and infrastructure. Terry Glenn, mayor of Springtown, said the low-water bridge on Old Springtown Road ‘‘is in poor condition now, and with increased traffic from the subdivision, it’s not gonna last more than a year or two.’’ Several other Springtown officials and residents described narrow dirt roads, periodic washouts and limited law-enforcement presence. Chris Taylor, an alderman, warned that household vehicle counts are higher than the developer’s conservative estimate and said the narrow road could not safely accommodate two-way traffic or construction trucks.

Neighbors and other speakers described repeated local crime incidents, concerns about emergency-response times and the prospect that increased traffic would worsen already fragile road conditions. James Dorsey, a long-time resident, told the board the county ‘‘does not have the money to fix that road’’ and urged caution about approving development that would increase demands on failing infrastructure.

Roth, who spoke from the audience, and his team said they do not intend to clear-cut the site and that lot sizes (1–2.45 acres) would support relatively large homes. Roth said the houses would “probably most likely be a minimum of 2,600 square foot” and later estimated ‘‘these homes will be upwards [of] $700,000 per house and above.’’ He said covenants and an HOA would be created and that septic designs would be finalized with the Arkansas Department of Health during later permitting.

Board members debated whether the applicant had satisfied county goals for rural development and public safety. Several members said the county ordinance allows a developer to be required to make off-site road improvements when a proposed development ‘‘is of a size and magnitude to show cause for additional off-site improvements,’’ but they also noted practical limits: right-of-way ownership, the county’s lack of a comprehensive plan for unpaved roads, and the quorum court’s authority over large off-site projects.

Votes on a standing motion to approve the preliminary plat resulted in: Mister Gotcher — No; Miss Lloyd — No; Dr. O’Neil — No; Mister Reams — Abstain; Mister Smith — No; Missus Kidderman — No. The motion failed (tally: yes 0, no 5, abstain 1). Chair noted options available to the applicant, including working with staff to clarify conditions, addressing infrastructure and off-site road-improvement expectations, or returning with a revised proposal.

Why it matters: board members said allowing subdivisions that meet dimensional standards but rely on narrow, unpaved roads and limited emergency access risks public safety and can shift long-term costs to neighbors and the county. The decision leaves the developer the option to revise the plat, propose off‑site improvements, or seek alternative mitigations before returning for further review.

What’s next: staff told the board it can provide a list of options and conditions the applicant could pursue prior to a future submission. The board did not vote to send the plat to engineering for additional off-site roadway studies during this meeting; the developer may return with changes or request specific conditions.