Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conditional Use Repeal Eagle Crest topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge planning board to oppose ordinance that would repeal conditional-use permit requirement for Eagle Crest recovery
Summary
At a June 9 public hearing, residents and an attorney urged the planning board to oppose a quorum-court ordinance that would repeal the countys conditional-use permit requirement for Eagle Crest Recovery; county attorney described ongoing federal and state litigation.
The Washington County Planning Board on June 9 held a public hearing on a quorum-court ordinance that would repeal the requirement that Eagle Crest Recovery obtain a conditional-use permit (CUP). The hearing was convened to satisfy Arkansas law requiring a public hearing before such an ordinance, and the Planning Board noted it was not the quorum court and would not vote on repeal.
County legal counsel told the public the county faces pending federal litigation and a state-court appeal related to a prior denial of a CUP for the facility. Counsel described potential exposure under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act and said the quorum court had forwarded an ordinance repealing the denial to mitigate legal risk.
Charles McKinney, who identified himself as speaking for War Eagle Cove residents and his sister, urged the board to recommend the quorum court uphold the original CUP denial. McKinney said the facility had continued operating after the CUP denial without addressing the stated reasons for denial and listed concerns from the earlier denial as: lack of a certified septic system, non-compliance with the Arkansas Fire Protection Code, unresolved issues with night lighting and delivery truck behavior, and other public-safety matters. McKinney argued courts do not grant blanket zoning exemptions under the ADA or Fair Housing Act and cited Oxford House, Inc. v. City of Virginia Beach as contrary precedent mentioned in his remarks.
A public board member who spoke during the hearing said the boards earlier denial was based on suitability for the area rather than an argument about single-family classification, and urged the quorum court to "stick to their guns." The Planning Board closed the public hearing after several public speakers and directed that the record be shared with the quorum court, which will decide the ordinance.
No formal Planning Board action on repeal was taken at the hearing; the Planning Board served as the public-hearing forum required by state law and will transmit remarks to the quorum court for final action.
