Washington County justices add conditions to Gully Ranch permit after hours of testimony
Loading...
Summary
After more than three hours of testimony and a lengthy public comment period, Washington County Quorum Court added two conditions to the Gully Ranch conditional‑use permit — limiting events to 200 guests and requiring a driveway‑maintenance agreement — and advanced the ordinance to a second reading at a later meeting.
A specially called Washington County Quorum Court meeting devoted several hours to testimony about a proposed event venue on 69.28 acres owned by Fred Gulley, ultimately adding two conditions to the planning board–approved conditional‑use permit (CUP) and sending the amended ordinance on for a second reading at the next regular meeting.
The court heard planning staff outline the application and review process: Sam Adda/Doctor Atta told justices the planning board had approved the Gully Ranch CUP in June, that staff mailed 13 certified notices to adjacent owners, and that the proposal includes a 3,375‑square‑foot event building, five short‑term rental cabins and one primary residence with about 116 gravel parking spaces and up to roughly 300 guests per event.
Neighbors and residents lined up to testify for and against the proposal. Opponents raised concerns about traffic and safety on Black Oak Road, fugitive dust from a long private driveway, stormwater runoff and the adequacy of detention ponds, proximity of cabins to property lines (opponents said cabins could be as close as 10 feet to a neighbor), and whether certified notice and survey changes complied with ordinance deadlines. Multiple residents also reported what they described as erosion and incomplete road construction at the site.
Supporters described community benefits, including youth programs and accessible outdoor opportunities. Applicant representatives said the venue footprint is a small fraction of the parcel and that most acreage will remain agricultural. Project engineers and surveyors told the court they had preliminary approvals in process — septic sign‑offs from the Arkansas Department of Health, stormwater controls and coordination with ADEQ and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — and that the private driveway was engineered as a 20‑foot gravel access with fire‑agency input.
After deliberation framed around the county’s seven CUP criteria (adequacy of utilities/roads/drainage; compatibility; public health and safety; effects on property values), Justice Rio Stafford proposed two conditions: the applicant would self‑limit events to 200 guests and submit a written driveway‑maintenance plan to planning staff. Owner Fred Gulley agreed to both conditions on the record. The court approved the two amendments by roll call. Later, a motion to suspend rules and take the ordinance to a second reading immediately failed; the court therefore scheduled the formal second reading at the next regularly scheduled Quorum Court meeting.
What happens next: the amended ordinance will return to the court for a second reading and final action; until that second reading, the CUP is not final. The county’s planning staff will receive the driveway‑maintenance plan and monitor other permitting steps identified by the applicant, including final septic and relevant environmental permits.
