AGENDA
WASHINGTON
COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
&
ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS
Wednesday,
January 24, 2007
4:00 pm, Quorum Courtroom, New Court House
280 N. College Avenue
Fayetteville, Arkansas
1.
Roll Call
2.
Approval of the agenda
3.
New Business
a.
Consideration of the commencement of civil action against paradigm
companies/ Tracy Hoskins to enjoin
and restrain them from violating Washington county land development regulations
b.
General discussion of the CUP process for new members.
c.
Other matters
4. Adjourn
MINUTES
WASHINGTON
COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
&
ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS
Wednesday,
January 24, 2007
4:00 pm, Quorum Courtroom, New Court House
280 N. College Avenue
Fayetteville, Arkansas
1.
ROLL CALL:
Roll
call was taken. Members
present include: Larry Walker, Randy Laney, Robert Daugherty, Gary Head, Billy
G. Smith, Kenley Haley, and Cheryl West.
2.
Approval of the agenda
Larry Walker made a motion
to approve the agenda. Cheryl West seconded.
Motion passes.
3.
New Business
Tracy Hoskins
(Family Jewels, LLC and President of Paradigm Companies), owner of the proposed
project, was present to answer any questions.
Laney
stated, “I will let the public know that this Board has not done this before
under the new regulations that has recently been passed by the Quorum Court.
The Board is going to consider actions that it would take.
The application for Conditional Use Permit will properly be before this
Board at its regular meeting on February 1, 2007.
Any action taken today will not really have any bearing on the
Conditional Use Permit granted, that is not the issue for today.
At that meeting we’ll have a lot more time to comment on all of the
things that should be considered before this Board will grant or deny the
Conditional Use Permit.”
George Butler, Washington County Attorney, commented, “I want to
apologize to the Judge for complicating this and or making it worse.
How this all started was back in November 2006 Mr. Hoskins asked if he
could go ahead with grading and clearing his land. The mother of all e-mail wars began as to whether or not he
could clear his land. I asked Judge
Hunton to sign an agreement that for Mr. Hoskins to do these things that he
agrees by this legal action that he is not to gain any vested right to have his
Conditional Use Permit approved. I
realized then I may have caused the Judge to sign something that was not within
the scope of his authority. The
agreement became null and void when I realized that it would have to go through
the Planning Board. Under Section
11-114 (3) The Chairman of the Planning Board shall instigate with the County
Judge’s office any such suit within thirty (30) days of Planning Board actions
upon written notice by the County Road Superintendent of known violations.”
Butler added, “I felt like that we needed to clarify the ordinance, so an
emergency ordinance was passed by the
Quorum Court on January 8, 2007 prohibiting activities such as clearing and
grading while an application is
pending approval. I wasn’t sure
at that time of the status of the ordinance after it passed as pertaining to Mr.
Hoskins, and it had. I looked again
at the current code. Mr. Hoskins
has commenced clearing; I don’t think he’s
done any grading. I was there when
Jack Butt, plaintiff’s attorney, spoke to
the Judge. A restraining order
has
been issued.”
Laney
stated, “For the three new Planning Board members (Billy G. Smith, Kenley
Haley, and Cheryl West), this is their first Planning Board meeting ever.”
Butler
commented, “I gave notice on January 9, 2007, which is the day after the
Quorum Court passed the emergency ordinance, and I sent an e-mail to advise that
they cannot pursue.”
Juliet
Richey, Washington County Planning Director, stated, “I am going to read
Donnie Coleman’s, Washington County Road Superintendent, written notice ‘On
Monday, January 22, 2007, at about 2:00-2:30 pm, Juliet Richey and myself
observed (by standing in the public right of way of Finger Road) clearing on the
property at Finger Road, owned by Family Jewels, LLC, tax parcel 001-11280-000.
There was a track hoe and bulldozer on site, which were engaged in the
clearing of trees and brush. At the
time we were present, the bulldozer was engaged in the removal of trees on site.
Development applications for this property have been received by the
Washington County Planning Office. These
applications show Paradigm Company and Tracy Hoskins to be the applicant.
President of Paradigm Company is Tracy Hoskins.
The pictures attached show the time to be 3:00-3:30 pm due to the camera
not having been adjusted for Daylight Savings time.”
Laney commented, “The complaint in an essence asks the Court to issue a TRO
(temporary restraining order) to stop the work of clearing the site.
There is also a separate civil lawsuit filed by property owners on
Finger
Road.”
Hoskins
had nothing to add.
Alan
Lane, stated, “I am a member of the Finger Road Association (POA), there are
several members present. We do not
have any comments. We have taken
civil action of our own.”
Walker
asked, “How does the clearing going on relate to the drawings on the
Preliminary LSD Plan?”
Richey
replied, “I have only been there once since he has started clearing the
property. His drawings submitted in
the past show selective clearing proposed.
When looking at the site on Monday it appeared that he was doing some
sort of selective clearing, it’s hard to say anything beyond that.”
Head
asked, “George, on a legal side, if a TRO has already been granted, what does
this action do? Mr. Hoskins can no
longer do anything until the proper time and place assuming he gets approval.
Why do we want to spend more money to do the same thing?”
Butler
replied, “Any private person can file a civil action. The reason why the County needs to file suit is to be able to
participate in the arguments and give testimony.”
Head
asked, “What if we file this and Fourth Circuit Judge Mike Mashburn issues
another TRO, is that what we’re asking?”
Butler replied, “The hearing that is coming up will determine whether
or not the TRO will stand.”
Head
asked, “That gets us into some kind of ‘seat at the table’ at the action.
In the meantime, I assume that Mr. Hoskins will come before this Board
and ask us to look at some kind of approvals that will allow him to do all of
the things that he is trying to do?”
Butler
replied, “Before he can begin work on a project he will have to have
Preliminary Plat approval. The only
way that one could get around you is some sort of variance which would require
three fourths of a vote of the entire Board.”
Head
commented, “Obviously, work has been done that should not have been done by
our ordinance. If we sue to stop
him and we’re asking the Court to side on our side and the outcome of that
is…”
Butler
stated, “That he will stop until he had gotten approval from the Board.”
Head
commented, “That is what this will accomplish.”
Laney
asked, “On the agenda there
is a discussion of the Conditional Use Permit process for new members,
would it be appropriate to get a feel for what we are doing and change the agenda?”
Richey
replied, “This does not actually relate to the Conditional
Use Permit process. This has a
different type of Planning regulations.”
Head
asked, “George, in your opinion, is this panel’s responsibility to do
exactly what is drafted?”
Butler
replied, “Yes.”
Walker
stated, “This is all new to us, therefore, we need to be very cautious at the
same time we need to back our legal counsel.”
Larry
Walker moved to commence
civil action against paradigm companies/Tracy Hoskins to enjoin and restrain
them from violating Washington county land development regulations
Robert Daugherty seconded. Motion passes.
Walker
commented, “The reason that I move forward is if Mr. Hoskins went through the
process with the Planning Board then it would have been a whole different
situation, I feel like he is overstepping his bounds.”
Laney
stated, “It passes and commence civil action as described.”
Richey
stated, “In the Planning Board/Zoning Board of Adjustments notebook, Article 6
Sec. 11 – zoning. The zoning
ordinance (ordinance 2006-066) creates zones in single family residential for
one unit per acre or agricultural. The
zoning map shows areas that if a development that is something besides single
family one unit per acre or some type of agricultural then it will need to
proceed to reflect that certain use through the Conditional Use Permit process,
it is just portions of the County, it’s not the whole County. The zones depicted on the zoning map are one mile from second
class Cities and two miles from first class Cities. There are un-zoned corridors along some of the State
Highways.”
Richey
added, “Article 10 is the criteria for allowance of Conditional Uses.
(a.) That a written application has been filed with the Planning Office
and the appropriate fee has been paid. (b.)
That the applicant has provided proof that each property owner as set out in
Article 14 has been notified by return receipt mail.
(c.) That adequate utilities, roads, drainage, and other public services
are available and adequate or will be made available and adequate if the use is
granted. That includes
infrastructure, fire, roads, drainage, and other utilities, usually water and
electricity. (d.) That the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area. Compatible does not mean exactly the same as identical.
Will those two uses operate next to each other without causing some sort
of grief. (e.) That the
establishment, maintenance, or operation of the Conditional Use will not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or
general welfare. (f.) That the
Conditional Use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property
in the surrounding area for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially
diminish and impair property values within the surrounding area.
(g.) That the establishment of the Conditional Use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding area for uses
permitted in the zone.”
Richey
also added, “I will create a spreadsheet of each project that comes in for a
Conditional Use Permit and look at items separately to see the difference.
The Paradigm Development is directly adjacent to Fayetteville’s City
limits, so we’re going to look at infrastructure; how the roads impact the
water system and things like that, all of that is going to be laid out for you
and what the issues are. (2.) If it is determined that there exist conditions that
could be imposed by the Board that would significantly lessen the impact of the
aforestated, then the Board has the power to impose said conditions which shall
be specifically set forth. An
example is a tire shop, someone may have a general retail office area and
someone wants to put in a tire shop next to it, any tire shop may not be okay,
but if there is screening of outdoor storage, it is kept up properly, and is not
operating at all hours of the night, a tire shop could be acceptable.
It (any tire shop) may not be compatible with that area, but we could
look at the Conditional Use Permit (conditions that could be placed on it to
make it compatible) and it could be compatible.
That is the general gist of the ordinance.
I wanted to introduce you to that and let you know that I will be
providing you a spreadsheet and will have all of the information in front of you
to examine. If the Board doesn’t
think that it is enough information to make a decision then the Board can table
the project.”
Richey
asked, “George, can we have a meeting (workshop) with just three members?”
Butler
replied, “Yes, but you cannot make any decisions.”
4.
Adjourn
Gary
Head moved to adjourn. Robert Daugherty seconded. Motion passes.
Minutes
submitted by: Amanda Kimbel
Approved
by the Planning Board on:
__________Randy
Laney______________ Date: ___02/06/07_______
Randy
Laney, Planning Board Chairman
AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING OF
WASHINGTON
COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
&
ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS
February 6,
2007
4:00 pm, Quorum Court Room, New Court House
Fayetteville, Arkansas
1.
Roll Call
2.
Approval of the agenda
3.
New Business
4.
Adjourn
AGENDA
Legacy
Rock Quarries LSD Appeal Hearing
July 25, 2007
1:30
p.m., Quorum Courtroom, New Courthouse
Fayetteville,
Arkansas
County
Legacy Rock Quarries LSD
Location:
Section 19, 20, 29, & 30, Township 15 North, Range 33 West
Owner/Developer:
Dean and Mila Morris
Engineer/Surveyor:
HGM Consultants, Inc. / Blew & Associates
Location Address: (WC #1018) Res. Dr. Cox
324.46 acres
MINUTES
Legacy
Rock Quarries LSD Appeal Hearing
July 25, 2007
1:30
p.m., Quorum Courtroom, New Courthouse
Fayetteville,
Arkansas
County
Legacy Rock Quarries LSD
Location:
Section 19, 20, 29, & 30, Township 15 North, Range 33 West
Owner/Developer:
Dean and Mila Morris
Engineer/Surveyor:
HGM Consultants, Inc. / Blew & Associates
Location Address: (WC #1018) Res. Dr. Cox
324.46 acres
Washington County Judge
Jerry Hunton will hear the above-captioned appeal to the County Planning
Board’s decision regarding Legacy Rock Quarries LSD.
Dean Morris, owner of the
proposed project, and Clay Grote and Eric Heller, HGM Consultants, Inc., were
present to answer any questions.
On July 5, 2007 the
Washington County Planning Board denied Legacy Rock Quarries LSD based on the
safety of some of the surrounding property owners.
Judge Hunton stated,
“This is a hearing concerning the proposed quarry on the western side of
Washington County just south of Highway 62 near the Oklahoma line.
As hearings go, normally, we don’t have a large crowd. The Quorum Court
Room is probably not as friendly in nature because the Quorum Court sits here
and we discuss and the public comes and comments at the table.”
Judge Hunton also stated,
“Anytime that we have an issue where people’s communities are involved
whether it be a landfill or quarry or any of those big ticket items that would
end up changing the face of your community from the day they begin the operation
forward both due for the good or the bad depending on your opinion.
It draws out a lot of emotions out of a lot of people.
Today, in the hearing process, we’ll hear from each side that they’ll
present their case. Then, I’ll
entertain some public comment, once the public comment becomes repetitive; I
start hearing the same thing over and over again, we’ll cut the public comment
off.”
Judge Hunton added, “I want to assure you of a couple
of things that I’m going to abide by (number one) no matter what the question
is we’re going to apply the law and regulations of this County to that
question. It’s not going to be my
opinion and it’s not going to be the County Attorney’s, George Butler,
opinion, it is going to be what the law says and what the regulations say.
This points out one of the facts that I have said over and over again for
the last half a dozen years is that in this County we have been under the strain
of trying to figure out where we want to go for the next foreseeable future.
We had meeting after meeting about planning in this County, honestly
nobody showed up. For six years
very few people have ever showed up; had they shown up and had we had more
comprehensive planning for this whole County maybe even zoning for this whole
County; issues like this would be handled in a completely different manner, but
as I’ve said many, many times a lot of people don’t show up until their ox
is gored. When they’re past that
particular issue the next ox that gets gored is a whole new set of people
because the folks who just showed up on the last subject they don’t show up on
the next subject. It is difficult
to administer a County when the people in the County don’t take an active role
in determining their future. We’ve
had that opportunity here time and time again for people to come and say, ‘We
want comprehensive planning for this County.’
In fact I think what most people said is ‘We want people to be able to
do with their property as they see fit.’
Until you sit in a different position, that’s pretty much the way the
United States is proceeding. We do
have zoning now in sections of the County; it is two miles out for the Cities in
first class and mile out for Cities in second class.
We do have limited zoning in this County, because of that we have been
able to take care of a lot of matters. In
all honesty, most of the matters that come before us do come inside of those one
or two mile areas. In this case, it
is a considerable distance further out.”
Judge Hunton also added,
“The other thing today is that we’ll hear this testimony, we’ll make
certain comments, but there is a very good chance at the end of the meeting that
George Butler and I will take the information that we get from this meeting and
we will notify the press and the parties involved what the decision of the
County is. Again, it should not be
a surprise because like I said at the beginning we’re going to apply law and
regulation. If you’ve looked at
the laws and regulations of this County you can pretty well determine how this
is going to come out. Hopefully,
you have done that. It is not my
opinion because if I just simply go out there and say, ‘Well, I like this
group of people or I like this group of people and I’m going to base my
decision on who I like the most.’ You
know how long that would stand up in a Court of Law, not very long.
We have got to be able to apply law.
The other thing, we’re not going to issue any variances on this job.
I want you to understand that the County Judge’s office will not play a
role in whether or not this quarry goes in.
We’re going to follow the rules and regulations, there will not be any
variances given off of those rules and regulations.
You all had a hearing before the Planning Board they have made a ruling
and that ruling is being appealed. You
are here to be in that process.”
Grote commented, “I am
representing Dean Morris. The rock
quarry is located southwest of Summers is about 174 acres.
Rock quarries are a vital part of our community, we need rock for roads
and just like we need chickens and cows to feed our community, we need rock.
Mr. Morris’ property there has a very unique rock, it is a limestone
that is very durable very good for roads and concrete and such. We are proposing upgrading two and half miles of County road
to a Class 5 road 21’ wide pavement with 2’ shoulders to handle the truck
traffic. We’re here to hopefully
get this thing passed.”
Judge Hunton stated,
“We understand that you are appealing the decision of the Planning Board.
We also know that, anybody paying attention, Mr. Butler indicated that
the Planning Board made an error in the direction their decision went.
We’ll look at that and we’ll be issuing a statement on that right
after this meeting is done in the next day or two.”
Grote commented, “We
have followed all County regulations with everything up to this point and we
plan on doing so along with all Federal and State requirements.”
Judge Hunton asked,
“You did hear me loud and clear say that I am not going to issue any variances
on the road building part?” Grote
replied, “Yes sir.” Judge
Hunton stated, “The quarry is going to have a major uphill battle to make the
road work. I’m not saying it is
entirely impossible, but it is going to be tough.”
Butler stated, “I
realize that variances are not in enforce right now, there had been some talk of
variances at one hand. I said
in my opinion to the Planning Board and to you that in addition to the fact that
the Arkansas Supreme Court has said when a development meets our minimum
standards that they must be approved as well as have any other State Supreme
Court. There are also some Federal
Court opinions that say that we can be liable for damage in Attorney’s fees
for not approving something that meets our minimum regulations.”
Butler also stated, “On
the issue of variances, variances are supposed to be used sparingly and a
variance can never be used given in a manner such that violates the public
interest. What I understand the
situation with the roads right now, what kind of traffic that is going to out
there, I don’t see how if a variance is given how it will hold up in Court.
However, if their engineers are able to convince us that they can put in
a road not as wide as we required and with not as much right-of-way, and with
not as wide of a shoulder and it is equally safe and it is equally maintainable
then it is possible that may force to or we might be liable for damages.
I can envision that right now based on what I understand of the nature of
the roads right now plus the kind of traffic, but if they can demonstrate that
to us, we will to at least look at it.”
Heller commented, “One
of the major things was the variance for the right-of-way width.
I can tell you right now that it is going to be a problem.
From my understanding, is that the variance, is what you’re talking
about we’re going to need the right-of-way.”
Judge Hunton stated,
“To be honest with you when we were first approached we were lead to believe
that the community was behind the project and that the opposition was minimal if
it existed at all. That put us in
one philosophical position since we now know that there is opposition to the
quarry and that maybe some of the comments made to us before were not actually
correct. We’re back to square
one. I’m not going to shift the
balance in either direction by intervening from my office and giving variances.
So, we’re just going to stay out of the fight.
If by law and by regulation you can put this in then more power to
you.”
Heller commented,
“We’re only asking for Preliminary so that we can start going for MSHA
permits and things like that.”
Herman Cox, adjacent
property owner to the east at 11739 Wr Jones Road stated, “My property borders
on the east side of that full length. My
question has to do with the County Road so called.
This Cox Road and the existing road are not the same.
This road that they are using is across private property that is solely
owned by three people including myself. The
road was built with private funds; no County funds have ever been used on it, to
maintain it, or to build it to start with.
I have paperwork saying that it is limited to this.
Cox Lane is a different road and I think that we need to recognize that
there are two roads right here. None
of that is showed mainly because this new road is suddenly being called Cox
Road, which is not Cox Road.”
Butler
asked, “You’re saying Cox Road is actually Cox Lane?” Cox replied, “Yes sir.”
Butler commented, “I do know that what we call Cox Road is shown in the
County Road books as a Residential Drive. The
definition of a Residential Drive is a road out in the County that the county considers to be a
public road, but not a road that the County has accepted into its maintenance,
but that doesn’t mean that it is not a public road.”
Cox stated, “I didn’t
mean that. I’m talking about the
road that they’re using is not a public road.
It is not that road. There
are two roads there. It doesn’t
have a name. It is across private
property and built by private land owners and it runs parallel with this Cox
Lane which is a private residence road.”
Butler commented, “If
there is an unnamed road, and that is the only way that they can get to their
property; that means that they are landlocked.
If they are landlocked there is a statutory proceeding that they can go
through to acquire access, just like there is a potential statutory proceeding
for them to obtain this right-of-way. They
would have to go through first the County Court and sue each individual
landowner to get that right-of-way. The
same way they would have to file suit with the County Court if they are
landlocked to get a way to their property.
This the first time that I have heard that but if they are landlocked
then they would have to file suit to you, if you’re the owner, to get access
to their property.”
Cox stated, “There is
no access to that property. There
was down Cox Lane Private Drive that you’re talking about that shows up on the
County map which is just a single lane two track drive.”
Butler asked, “That is
something that we will have to dig into a little further to determine if that is
correct. The road that you’re
talking about is not part of Cox Lane; it is just an unnamed private road that
you own?” Cox replied, “I and
two other people own it.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“Are you saying that with these two roads that the preferred road by the owner
of the rock quarry property, they would prefer the unnamed road versus Cox Lane?
That is the one that they are using now, but they could use Cox Lane to
access the same property. Like he
said, if they can’t access one or the other than they are landlocked, then we
go through this suit where they get, basically, access to the property it is
eminent domain.”
Grote stated, “I’ve
been there several times and I only know of one road, and that is Cox Road.”
Judge Hunton asked,
“You’re saying that the access on the Residential Drive is the one that you
know about?” Grote replied,
“Yes sir.”
Juliet Richey, Washington
County Planning Director, commented, “I went out there before we heard this
and there is like one older drive they are about 10 or 12’ apart.
It looks like there was an older drive, neither of them are big roads,
now they made a newer one right next to it, I assume when the chicken houses
were built, I have no idea. They
are side by side, but one of them doesn’t look like it really used anymore, I
don’t know if it is or not. I
kind of assumed it was a replacement for that road.”
Cox stated, “The Cox
Lane Road was not even big enough for a chicken truck to get down.
When the chicken houses were built, the three landowners that were
involved, including myself, built a road beside this other road to access the
ten chicken houses that are seen on the map.
It is a private road.”
Grote
commented, “I may have assumed that was a driveway to the chicken place, but
every time I went in I went in on Cox Road.
It’s a new one to me.”
Cox
stated, “It’s not Cox Road.”
Judge
Hunton commented, “That is just an issue that we’re going to have to look
at. If you all don’t know then we
sure don’t know.”
Dustin Denton (Denton was
represented by John Everett at the July 5, 2007 Planning Board meeting) stated,
“I live in Oklahoma. I have two
pieces of property that are within a half a mile radius of this proposed site.
Most of the people on one side of the room are from Oklahoma and I
apologize that a lot of the people could not be here today because of work
conflicts and the time of this meeting. I
also feel like I need to apologize for not coming to the Planning Committee
meetings for Washington County. I
was not aware that it would have any effect on us and being in Oklahoma didn’t
know to come to those. I think that
it is very important to think about this Planning Board that made this first
decision. It seems like to me that
this Attorney for the County has said that they would have no choice but to vote
for this rock quarry. It seems like
to me if that was really true that the rock quarry would not even need to come
before this Board. I think that
this Board is made up of very highly qualified people.
They voted unanimously against this proposal.
I think that is very important to understand and respect that these
people are highly qualified and represent the people of the community and that
they all agreed that this was probably not a good idea.
I think that has merit to it and deserves some respect that this Planning
Board all acted in agreement. I
don’t know if they are appointed or elected people, but obviously, they
represent the community and probably do a very good job of that.”
Denton added, “I have
an issue with the fact in the newspapers that the Attorney for the County has
repeatedly said that you must rule for this.
I take issue with that because you are a Judge and you have the ability
to make judgment either way. If you
had no other choice but to say yes then why would there be an appeal to you, it
would automatically be approved? I
know that you must follow the law. I
think sometimes maybe the law does not have adequate provision for certain
cases. Maybe there is no law that
would say a man has chicken houses within a few hundred feet of a blast site,
and we need to protect him. Sometimes
the law may not make a provision for every single case. I think that this Planning Committee all voted unanimously on
this there must be some merit to the idea that there is something there that
needs to be looked into. I would
appreciate your consideration in it. I
think that it is not a case where we move to the airport and bought a house at
the airport and then complained about the airplanes coming over and making
noise. This is an issue where this
is our way of life and this is coming out to us.
I don’t want to be a dead horse because, obviously, you can hear lots
of stories about how bad this is going to be, with the noise, dust, and all
that. It just seems like to me that
the law may not make a provision here for this and that maybe that would require
a Judge to make some intervention in it. I
appreciate your time.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“That is understandable. I
appreciate you all coming from Oklahoma. It’s
great you got a Country where people can cross State lines and sit in a room and
at least be heard and also hear the reasons why that government has to do what
they have to do. All of the members
are appointed by me and confirmed by the Quorum Court.
I do respect every single one of them they are highly intelligent
successful people. Hopefully, those
are the kinds of people I will continue to appoint to Boards.
If I were maybe in your shoes I would be feeling the same way that you
felt maybe even up here saying the same thing that you said.
Unfortunately, I’m not. Something
that you don’t know about me is I’m a former legislator, which I actually
created law before I became County Judge and administered County ordinances.
The problem is that whether we like it or not we have to follow the
letter of the law. Sometimes the
letter of the law seems a little foreign to us, especially if we’re on the
other side of the fence from it. We do have to follow the letter of the law, and if we don’t
like the law we hopefully get hold of our legislators or our Quorum Court
members and we change the law. That
is the difficult part that I eluded to earlier is we have a very tough time in
this County changing the law and putting in place planning regulations that
would take care of not only us now but into the future.”
Judge Hunton also
commented, “The last comment I have and a very valid point is why do you have
Planning Board meetings if the Planning Board’s feelings are not going to
rule? That is a problem, and
without zoning and without regulations, in many cases in the past history of
Washington County it’s been a wide-open County.
Basically, you have hearings where people come and they comment and they
just kind of get everything off their chest, but does it really at the end of
the day affect anything, usually not. Why,
because we don’t have any rules for out in the County.
A lot of people liked it that way. I’ve
sat in front of groups larger than this that has told me that property rights is
paramount. Property rights is a great thing as long as you agree with
them. I’ve always said that
property rights is a double-edged sword because what you do on your property
maybe the worst thing in the world to the guy sitting next door.
That is what we got going on right now is we really have a property
rights issue in an area of the County that is not zoned and has no regulations.
These hearings by and large, I hate to say it, it amounts to not a whole
lot more than getting things off your chest and listening to what few rules we
do have, which is almost nonexistent out in the County.
We have given the people in this County the opportunity to make a
difference and come and change that over the last half a dozen years,
unfortunately, too many people have chosen not to come and participate.
We are extremely lucky to have what we have in this County that is
partial zoning. We’re going to
have more cases like this, by the way that the County and region is growing;
we’re going to have lots and lots of cases similar to this.”
Rod Lacie, adjacent
property owner to the west, asked, “I own 45 acres on the Oklahoma side that
joins this property. The big
concern that we have is I plan to retire. We
have a home site already set there. This
is going to change everything. There
are a lot of environmental issues that haven’t been addressed, and maybe later
on in the process those will be addressed there are springs that feed several of
the creeks across there. A question
that I have, the first notification we got said 325 acres and the last Board
meeting it said I think 157 acres. Is this a two phase? Are
they going to move on down?”
Richey replied, “The
300 (324.46) acres is both of the parcels that were involved.
When the notification first went out they were still one they have now
been separated. Parcel A is where
the rock quarry is going to take place and the only way that Parcel B (149.84
acres) is involved is a portion of the haul road comes through this area to go
out. Mainly it takes place on
Parcel A that is 174.62 acres. There
is no Phase 2; it’s just those parcels were one piece when they first came.”
Lacie asked, “Where
does the environmental issue the air quality and all that where does all that
come into play, in the permit? Air
quality is a big concern because I live not to far from one in Tulsa.
In the summer time, you can drive by there and the trees are white from
the dust and that kind of thing. It
seems to me there are 65 (Arkansas and Oklahoma notifications) families on the
listing of this that it will have some impact on, also, the monetary gain of
one. It seems like there is some
law somewhere, I understand what you are saying, that if I do something on my
property and it don’t affect this guy at all over here then that’s great.
If I do something that is going to affect 65 families there should be
something that can be done about it.”
Judge Hunton stated,
“If I was on the other side of the fence I would be saying the same things
that you all have been saying. As I
said earlier in the meeting, we got to apply the laws strictly and we got to
apply the regulations strictly. If
the law doesn’t exist or the regulations don’t exist or the regulations do
exist we are going to apply them as such. As
a society we can’t wait to write law the day after we discover that someone
wants to do something in our backyard. That’s
really the crutch of this whole thing is that probably the day before you all
knew about this quarry everything was fine out where you lived and probably
didn’t have any issues whatsoever, but that was the time, in all honestly,
that the community should have been developing some rules and regulations to
keep things as they liked them rather than waiting until something like this
comes along and then coming to the County and saying we want relief, that’s
just not something that we can do.”
Richey commented, “What they are requesting today and
at the July 5, 2007 meeting is Preliminary approval. We look at the regulations that we have and they make a
Preliminary plan to address those. The
three major things that we can address with this type of development is impact
on County roads, which we talked about a little bit, they will be required to
upgrade off-site roads all the way back to Highway 62, they have to determine a
traffic count, so that we can figure out how thick the pavement has to be to
hold up the loaded trucks as well as the width of pavement and shoulders and
everything that goes along with that. The
other thing to look at is drainage, drainage as it affects the right-of-way and
surrounding properties. That has
been looked at as far the Preliminary stage it is good to go.
We do have another Engineering firm (CEI Engineering Associates, Inc.)
that the County has contracted with that is reviewing this.
All of this goes in front of engineers.
The last thing is adherence to the Arkansas State Fire Code.
As far as that goes for this sort of site, they do have a building, a
scale house, on-site and that will have to be reviewed by the Fire Marshal as
far as exits and things like that.”
Richey also commented, “As far as Preliminary goes they
really have everything in place. They
do have to have a dust abatement plan and they have submitted that which is
basically that they will keep all of the unpaved areas watered down to keep the
dust from getting out of hand. All
loads that leave here will be covered. Basically,
once you get Preliminary approval then there is the Construction Plan phase,
that’s when they are going to submit detailed construction plans to us for the
upgraded off-site roads. Every
piece of road will be shown, how the drainage is going to be reworked in the
ditches, what utilities have to be moved, all that.
All of the little detail work as far as the roads go happens then. They will be submitting to various environmental agencies,
ADEQ (Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality) they are going to look at
their environmental plan and MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) they
have to get mining permits through them. Those
are the people that are going to monitor the blasting and things like that.
Those are State and National agencies that have jurisdiction over those
environmental impacts what the water looks like when it is coming off this when
they are doing their mining throughout the mining process, to how its mined,
whether its done safely, how the blasting is done, all of that is regulated by
those other agencies. They are
going to start submitting plans when they are doing the road construction
documents they will also start submitting plans to those agencies to be
approved. After all of the
infrastructure is built, the County engineer has reviewed all of the plans for
the roads, the roads are widened and the right-of-way is obtained then they can
come back for Final approval. That is going to be a separate meeting.
After they get Final approval only then can they start, like at the
meeting there were some people asking questions last time about they say that
they’ll fix the roads then they go ahead and start and the roads will never be
fixed. That is not an option, all
of that has to be completed before they can get Final approval.”
Donnie Coleman,
Washington County Road Superintendent, stated, “The road coming all the way
from Highway 62 all the way into their property the driving surface of the hot
mix will be 21’ wide with 2’ shoulders on side of the asphalt with the
drainage ditches cleaned up. All of
the drainage issues along the road will be taken care of.
They need to have the required 30’ right-of-way from the center of the
existing County Road now and that will carry up to Cox Lane and the same thing
will be on Cox Lane going up into it. It
will need to have the 21’ driving surface with drainage on the sides of the
roads with ditches and all that took care of. It will be 30’ from centerline
both directions on both sides of the road, a total of 60’ right-of-way from
Highway 62 all the way into Cox Lane.”
Lacie asked, “You were
saying that all of the regulations is controlling the Arkansas side.
What recourse do we have on the Oklahoma side that will apply to us?”
Judge Hunton replied, “I think that the State line pretty well defines
that. You’re going to have to
appeal Arkansas law for land inside Arkansas, file a lawsuit.”
Lacie commented, “If we
have an issue then we’ll have to take it up with the Arkansas side.”
Judge Hunton stated, “You’re going to work through this County
through Planning and the County Attorney if you have any issues with anything
that goes on inside Washington County.” Lacie commented, “Inside the County but not in Oklahoma,
they don’t have any jurisdiction in Oklahoma.”
Judge Hunton stated, “We don’t cross the line into Oklahoma but
Oklahoma can’t cross the line into Arkansas.”
Lacie commented, “So, we don’t have any recourse.”
Butler stated, “MSHA is a Federal agency so State lines won’t make
any difference, they control the blasting.
Oklahoma has a counterpart to ADEQ; anything that goes a riot in Oklahoma
they will address. We never have had an interstate situation like this before, I
don’t know if Arkansas’ ADEQ will be in communication with Oklahoma’s
counterpart or not.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“Anything that deals with Washington County Planning, in other words, Oklahoma
can’t really interfere with things that goes on in her Planning Office.
If it’s State you can make certain requests there and if it’s Federal
you can certainly make requests there as far if it creates a new drainage ditch
I suppose across the State line you can have recourse through the State and
Federal.”
Charlene Scott, adjacent
property owner to the northeast at 11389 Wolf Track Lane, stated, “I border
the site on the north side that is where my house is located.
That is classified as West Mountain and it has always been known for all
of its springs and all of us are on well water including the chicken houses.
We do have west Washington County rural water that passes along that
road. However, it is so cost
absorbent to hook up to right now for those of us that live quite a ways off the
road, especially the chicken houses, it is feasibly not possible. We are very concerned with our wells and how they might be
affected. I do know that West
Mountain and the property that I own across the road that they are going to be
going down that road has multiple sinkholes.
They have been well documented we had an application for a landfill that
they had to come in and do a bunch of KARST studies. I am in the process of procuring a lot of those studies that
will document these sinkholes. My
concern is these sinkholes sort of seem to come from that mountain and go across
my property onto CAM which is way on over from this site.”
Scott also stated,
“That whole area all of our wells a lot of them are in the same substance as
they are going to be blasting. My
concern is when they start blasting and start getting any movement through this
co-existing of carbon of rock or limestone that they are in it is going to
affect what we are sitting on and the rock features that lead to these sinkholes
that are well documented. They have
not given us any assurances or studies as to how these sinkholes could open up
because during the time that they did the studies for the landfill these seemed
to come and go they were affected by the weather, streams, and by the all
weather streams coming out of this area.”
Scott added, “I’m
very concerned that I’m going to be facing a nightmare later because adequate
studies or considerations were not given at the time for exactly you have rock
here but what’s inside that rock and how it affects all of the other areas
that’s going to be affecting us. I
am wanting someone to give me some kind of a study or assurance or whatever that
it is not going to adversely affect these areas that have already been proven
unstable very close to the site. I
am in the process of getting more studies on it and once I get the topographical
maps and the geology studies that they have done in the past it might lead me to
remove my concerns, but until I see that I am not going to be adversely
affected. We came away from the
Cities and construction and came to the Country for one type of life and I
don’t want it turned into a nightmare over night because someone jumped the
gun real quick and just wanted to follow law and didn’t give me adequate
protection of seeing how it would affect me.
I just ask for your consideration on that.”
Judge Hunton asked, “I
remember when they were trying to site the landfills. Why do you suppose the community at that time didn’t get
together and say ‘Why don’t we try to keep ourselves from having another
nightmare like this one in the future?’ Approach County government and say
‘We need some protection out in the County.”
Edgar Garrett replied,
“We didn’t know that it was available.
I was not aware of it.”
Judge Hunton stated,
“The job that I’m in, I have now dealt with this from Elkins, around east of
Springdale, to the other side of Springdale, outside of Fayetteville, outside of
Prairie Grove, and now over at Lincoln. This
is not the first time that we have had an issue of basically not my backyard.
We’ve had a dozen of issues. That’s
one of the reasons that we now have partial zoning in the County because at
least we did have a coming together of some citizens that told the Quorum Court
‘We no longer want this wide-open County that we’ve had forever,’ but yet
at the same time people from around Morrow for instance that have come to this
meeting saying ‘We don’t want rules and regulations.”
Scott commented, “I
understand, I think that part of it is negativity on my part and on a lot of
people’s part. Who wants to be in
Summers, Arkansas? Summers,
Arkansas has nothing to offer anybody. When
you talk about the growth of Springdale, Fayetteville, Benton County, and
Washington County you see it so far away from you, so far unaffecting you, that
was the reason we moved out there was to be away from all that stuff.
So, we just never thought it would come to us.
We all were neighbors around there none of us would ever do anything to
harm anyone else on their property. We
never thought about a stranger coming in that just wants to get rich quick,
that’s the way it is. I would never do anything to hurt my neighbors.
My land has every bit as much as the stuff on it as his does; I would
never do that to my neighbors. We
never thought that there would be somebody that would come and do that.
That’s my excuse; I just never dreamed that would happen.”
Garrett stated, “I’m
a property owner on the State line in Oklahoma.
If we did come to the Quorum meetings to get you to re-zone that we
wouldn’t have any say anyhow. Most
of us are retired people on that State line.
They come out there and build something just across the State line where
we don’t have any say in it. We
wouldn’t have had any say if we did come to the meetings, which I would have
liked to have been able to. I
don’t see why somebody can come over in Arkansas just across my fence; our
property joins, create a dust problem. There
are people over there that are sick. It’s
just to line his pocket and we have no say whatsoever in the matter because we
live across the State line. I
wouldn’t do that to my neighbor because I wouldn’t be a neighbor if I did
that.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“I can assure you that had you did come to the meetings you would have been
heard. You have to recognize the
fact that you wouldn’t be a Washington County resident, but the people in
Washington County I think are open enough to listen to people across the line.
I was involved in 1994 in getting the first ideas of a water line from
our part of the country to Westville for rural water.
We had to cross the State line and helped.
You are not voters in this County and that would have to be something
that folks would recognize. As far
as you coming, listening, and talking we’d diffidently listen to you.”
Garrett stated, “I’m
like Mr. Cox, I didn’t know you had such a thing.
I’ve never heard of it.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“I have never had a contingent of people from across the State line here
before on a hearing, this is a first. The
people that I refer to when I say that about people not coming is the residents
of Washington County, they have had ample opportunity to come to this Court on
many, many occasions and talk to the Court about what they would like to see out
in the County as far as Planning. We
had a committee (PARA taskforce) started about two years ago that was highly
publicized. We had about 40 members
on the committee, we held hearings at the Court House, we tried every way in the
world to get people to come and participate.
The people who were opposed didn’t have too much trouble knowing it was
going on because they showed up in droves; it was still a fairly small number.
Finally, about a year ago we started having people in subdivisions coming
in who no longer wanted to have their subdivision and maybe a nice house on an
acre or something like that sitting next to a subdivision that had four houses
per acre; they didn’t think that was a good mix.
Those folks started coming in having their say and all of a sudden the
thing changed. Unfortunately, it
only changed for a short distance out into the County it did not go all the way
out because those people from Morrow, Summers, Sunset, and Hazel Valley didn’t
show up. They didn’t come and say
we want to be included in that, the Quorum Court took that as a signal that they
did not want to be included in that, so they limited the zoning.
It is still not too late for a lot of people out there who have not had
an issue in their neighborhood yet, we can still have people come to the Quorum
Court and say ‘We want to extend zoning to the County line, all over the
County, but we have not heard anyone say that.”
Garrett stated, “They
say that they’re going to have dust collectors.
Marble City has a rock quarry and houses and property are white for two
miles around it. From what I
understand, the Attorney said that they have no law to enforce what they agreed
to after they get in there. The
gentleman said that they would only be blasting twice a week from 8:00 – 5:00;
we have to take him at his word. They
are going to keep the dust down; we have to take him at his word. It seems like Arkansas has no law that they can enforce to
see that he will keep his promise that he says that they are going to do.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“I don’t know about Marble City, but the County has a quarry in Morrow.
We have been a pretty good neighbor I think down there.
I can tell you that in nine years that I’ve been in office I haven’t
had anyone come and say that the quarry is a problem and we’ve got to shut it
down. Having operated a quarry and having dealt with the State and
Federal people who look at our quarry on a regular basis; we have to follow the
law. We have issues to control our
blasting, dust, safety for our employees, and the air permits that we have to
have. We’ve been a good neighbor
at Morrow, Arkansas and because of that we have been able to improve roads all
over the western part of Washington County.
It is an issue; I think Arkansas does have laws.”
Garrett stated, “What
this man was promising if he didn’t keep his promise they couldn’t afford to
do it. Blasting more than twice a
week, only do it from 8:00 – 5:00, and they keep the dust down.
I’m not here to quarrel with you, but I am concerned.
My family and friends all live along the State line.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“Like I said earlier in the meeting, this is an emotional situation and if
there is anything that any of us can do to calm the fears on some of the
emotional side, in other words, maybe it is not the monster that you think it
is. It’s still maybe something
that you are uncomfortable with and don’t want out there, but you’ll
probably need to know what the truth is and maybe what is not the truth.
I can tell you from operating a quarry it can be done in a fairly
friendly manner. It will probably
not going to reduce anybody’s property values.
That is just the quarry that I had experience with, we try to run it
right, we try to run our operating hours from 8:00 – 5:00 don’t run late in
the evening, we try to be careful with our employees and traffic.
If someone calls me and tells me I have a dump truck driving too fast; I
try to follow up and find out who that driver is and take action.
Part of the job of the hearing is not only for you to get off your chest;
I think it is for me to try to give you maybe better information than what you
had in the past. A lot of what you
are feeling is emotion. If that
quarry were put in a year from now you might have a whole different idea about
how you feel about that quarry. Some
of you might be madder and some you may not be as near as mad.
Part of the process is bidding some of those issues and talk about them.
I appreciate you all coming and just like what you’re doing here today
we’re listening.”
Herman stated, “Donnie
Coleman said that the road will be improved to and not through Cox Road?”
Coleman replied, “I said all the way through Cox Road.”
Judge Hunton stated,
“The road has to be improved to the site and 250’ inside that site.”
Koua Xiong, adjacent
property owner to the east, commented, “I want to thank you for the
opportunity for me to express my concerns about our health, our well and pond,
and the contract with the poultry company.
I talked to them they said that they will see if poultry house is close
to rock quarry. My family and I do
expect that the County has rules and laws.
I have a great concern. My
lifetime savings that we have put on the farm could go down the drain. We would not be able to sell because no one would want to
live by a rock quarry. It is a concern.”
Lacie asked, “You
operate a quarry yourself? You will
be the one making the decision?” Judge
Hunton replied, “The County owns the quarry.
They owned the quarry 30 years before I became County Judge.
It will absolutely have no influence on anything we do here.
When we show you the rule of law as we have in place, unless you just
simply want me to ignore the law, you will see what I’m talking about.
I have to uphold the law. In
fact, we have a quarry in Morrow and I’ll tell you right now we are trying to
put a quarry in the eastern side of the County; there is a tremendous difference
between a quarry for public good versus a private quarry.
No judgments are made. I
lived on a dirt road and I’ve lived on a highway and I have been a person who
as a 19-year-old kid work to get the dirt road turned into a highway.
Does that influence me on whether somebody should have a dirt road or a
highway? I can tell you what it
feels like to live on either one. Normally,
I go by what the current needs are. There
are 1,000 miles of County Road to maintain in this County and sometimes my
opinion of which roads to work on, which roads that we are just going to
maintain, and which roads may not get as much work depends if you live on that
road you are not going to agree with me if you don’t get what you want.
When we do pave some roads people really like that in most cases.
There have been a few people dislike it because we did pave the road.
It is one of those you can’t win situations, that is the way that
County government works.”
Grote stated, “There
will be some pre-surveys done on adjoining property owners at least at 300’
and possibly more, that’s up to the owner.
There will be permanent monitoring systems around the boundary of the
property to monitor the blasting levels to keep down negative impact to
adjoining property owners.”
Judge Hunton commented,
“We have got a challenge to the Planning Board’s ruling.
We’re going to look at that and like I said earlier we’re going to
apply the laws and regulations, as they exist today to that question.
The other issue is the road issue and I have commented to you that I’m
not going out of hand to apply any variances to that.
Mr. Butler was referring to, basically, is that if we have independent
engineers not hired by the County and not hired by the quarry people tell us
that they can put the road in and meet all of the County’s standards, we might
have a difficult time in Court denying that.
I want you all to be clear on that and I want you to understand that some
things are out of our hands. This
can be appealed to Circuit Court. The
worst thing I can do would be to rule in the neighbor’s favor knowing that it
would never hold up. You would walk
out thinking you won only to get beat later.
The decisions that you make between now and then you would blame on me.
I would be your hero one day and your goat the next because any decision
that you make between now and the time the higher Court overturned me and ruled
in their favor, you wouldn’t blame the Court, you would blame me.
That’s why I have to rule according to what the law and regulations are
of today. That’s what you really
want me to do, whether you know it or not.
Having said that, we’re going to adjourn this meeting, and we will have
something out to you all shortly.”