Planning Commission

Planning Department August 27, 2012 The Russellville Planning Commission will hold its Regular Meeting August 27, 2012, at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Welcome Visitors 1. A request to review and approve the minutes of the July 23, 2012 regular meeting. 2. A request to review and recommendation of approval to the City Council to rezone property located on the east side of Vancouver Avenue between West Main Street and West Second Place, presently R-1 (Single Family Residential) to C-4 (Neighborhood and Quiet Business), submitted by Attorney Stephen R. Giles, on behalf of Ann Carpenter Marks, as Trustee of the Robert Carpenter Trust. (ZO.12.07.160) 3. Tabled from the July 23, 2012 meeting. A request to review and recommend approval to the City Council for a Special Use Permit to allow car sales in a C-2, for property located at 2711 North Arkansas, submitted by Ray Black, Jr. (SP.12.07.113) 4. A request to review and recommend approval to the City Council for a Special Use Permit to allow a proposed warehouse expansion for tires in a C-2 (Highway Commercial), located at Beacon Tire, 3838 East Main Street, submitted by Brent Abbott on behalf of A.J. Burk. (SP.12.08.114) 5. A request to approve the Preliminary Plat of StoneBrook Park Addition located north of Fairway & North Utica Avenue submitted by Kurt Jones of Kurt Jones Engineering, on behalf of Brent Lacefield of Russellville Housing Partners, LP. (SD.12.08.254) 203 South Commerce, P.O. Box 428, Russellville, AR 72811, (479) 968-2098 6. A request to approve the Preliminary Plat of West End Village located in the 4200 Block of West Main Street submitted by Dave Garza on behalf of owner Wayne Nordin and developer West End Village Limited Partnership. (SD.12.08.255) 203 South Commerce, P.O. Box 428, Russellville, AR 72811, (479) 968-2098  Russellville Planning Commission Minutes August 27, 2012 @ 5:30 p.m. The Russellville Planning Commission met in its regular meeting on Monday, August 27, 2012 at 5:30 p.m. in the Russellville City Hall Council Chambers. Members Present Chairman Dennis Boyd Vice-Chair Eric Westcott Gaylon Smith Jimmy Davenport Jimmy Sims Richard Perkins Herschell Hargus Burke Larkin, Council Liaison Members Absent Secretary Aldona Standridge Nick Patel Also present: Mayor Bill Eaton, City Planner David Harris, City Attorney Trey Smith, Jim Lynch/City Corp, Planning Assistant Lequitta A. Jones, Public Works Director Michael Oakes, Fire Marshall Richard Setian, Alderman Ron Knost, Alderman Mark Tripp, Alderman Kevin Freeman, Alderman Randy Horton, Price McMillen, Elizabeth Nokleby/River Valley Leader, Kurt Jones, Dave Garza, Morgan Barrett, David Brown, Roxanne Barker, Dolly Barker, William Barker, Earl Woker, John & Dean Strickland, Mary Jess Tibbels, Lynn Pollack, Ernie Peters, Jim & Pat Garrett, Jerry P. Peirce, Marian Bartlett, HL Shepherd, Jan Bennett, Christie Moore, Jeff Terry, Margie Smith, Brent Abbott, Gerald Hook, Connie Hook, John Peel, John Bynum, Ernie Beckman, Tim Murdock, Jim P. Knight, Donnie Frederic, Kent Dollar, John Cline, Craig Patterson, Craig Jeup/JPM Group, Stephen Giles, Larry Gulick, William Thornsberry, Kurt Jones, Jim Petty, Brent Lacefield, Dow Dollar, Ormond Peters, John Newton, Steve Hooten, AJ Burk, Les Howard, ML McCrotty, Margie Enderlin, Ray E Enderlin, Roseann Kennedy. WELCOME The First Order of Business: A request to review and approve the minutes of the July 23, 2012 regular meeting. Chairman Boyd noted that the commission would be approving the revised minutes. Commissioner Hargus moved to approve the minutes as revised and submitted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Smith and passed unanimously. The Second Order of Business: Request to review and recommend approval to the City Council to rezone property located on the east side of Vancouver Avenue between West Main Street and West Second Place, presently R-1 (Single Family Residential) to C-4 (Neighborhood and Quiet Business), submitted by Attorney Stephen R. Giles, on behalf of Ann Carpenter Marks, Trustee of the Robert Carpenter Trust. (ZO.12.07.160) Chairman Boyd stated that in addition to the typical contents in the commissioner's packets, there were a couple of items pertinent to the request. The chairman then read the following documents: (1) PETITION – “The following listed residents of Russellville, Arkansas respectfully request that any Petitioner, plans, or commercial development plans by Walmart on property located in and next to our residential neighborhood be denied. Specifically, the area located off of Vancouver Street; informally referred to as the Tom Carpenter Field. This has always been a quiet residential area which will be irreparable (sic) damaged by a Walmart Family Market Development.” (For record only: See attached Petition and signature sheets containing 52 names) (2) LETTER dated August 23, 2012 from the Russellville Area Chamber of Commerce supporting the rezoning, addressed to Mr. Stephen R. Giles who represents the applicant, read as follows: “The Russellville Area Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors voted on August 23, 2012 to support the proposed Walmart Neighborhood Market project in Russellville. This project is in line with our goal of promoting business, creating jobs, and supporting investment in our community. In addition to providing several hundred jobs, Walmart has been an outstanding corporate citizen with a tradition of supporting civic and charitable organizations in the Russellville area. Sincerely Jeff Pipkin, President and CEO.” (For record only: See attached letter) Chairman Boyd then addressed his fellow commissioners in regard to concerns about potential conflicts of interest and the possible desire for some members to abstain from voting or recuse themselves on this item based on perceived conflicts of interest. The chairman stated that in a city the size of Russellville it was nearly impossible for commissioners to avoid some connection with individuals directly impacted by the commission's decision on this proposal. He stated that while it might be tempting to use such connections as a reason to abstain, it is important for commissioners to fulfill their duties unless they feel strongly that they have a legitimate reason to abstain. The chairman encouraged his fellow commissioners, unless they have a direct connection to this request, to participate in the discussion and vote based on logical and sound analyses established by the facts presented, rather than on personalities, where they each may live, personal preferences, prerogatives, or connections to specific property owners. 2 Next, Chairman Boyd pointed out that the request was for rezoning, not a request to approve a Walmart Neighborhood Market. He also noted that the applicant has been forthcoming and there is no reason to believe that if the property is rezoned that something other than a Walmart Neighborhood Market would be built on the property. He emphasized that what we are voting on tonight is the requested rezoning of this property. Once this property is rezoned, it may be developed for any of the uses listed in the Zoning Code’s Table of Permitted Uses for C-4 zoned property. If it is rezoned tonight, the developer will have to come back before the commission for Large-Scale Development review. If the commission recommends approval of the request, it will be forwarded to the City Council for their meeting next month for legal and final action. If the item is not approved, the applicant still has the option of appealing the decision to the council at their meeting next month. They can exercise that option if they wish to do so. Finally, the chairman stated that there were likely individuals in the audience who would want to address the commission. He said if members of the public would like to comment for, or against, the proposal we encourage you to do that, but we will do it in an orderly manner. If you want to address the commission, please step to a microphone and state your name for the record, then address the commission. He noted that commissioners will not respond to questions raised from seated audience members. Everyone who wants to speak will be given an opportunity and we encourage you to come forward and do so. I know there is a lot of interest in this item and our goal is to hold a fair hearing. After the city planner delivers his staff report, we will allow the developer to make whatever presentation or remarks they care to make, then turn the floor over to the public. Mr. Boyd then yielded the floor to City Planner Harris. Mr. Harris synopsized his staff report, stressing what he believed were important general ideas that bear on rezoning reviews and decisions. There are two primary documents that come into play in such decisions, the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. The Comprehensive Plan is not law, but - in very brief terms - is rather a document created by staff, citizens, and elected officials that looks at current conditions of the city, develops some consensus among stake-holders as to a desirable direction or vision for the city to move toward in the future, and then determines a potential course of action to pursue that vision. The last step involves creating and passing ordinances that promote those ideas for the future contained in the plan, and typically also includes what is generally referred to as a future land use map, showing what the planning process has indicated are the best areas of the city for the various land classifications (or zones). The second document is the Zoning Code, which is a regulation/ordinance. The Zoning Code describes the various types of uses typically found in any city, then establishes through specific regulations and tables, where and under what conditions those uses may be legally established. The Zoning Code also includes a Zoning Map which shows the zoning designation for all property in the city. Both of these are intended, among other aims, to establish and enhance a sense of predictability and stability as to how land may be developed and used in the future, but 3 both are intended to be flexible and recognize that conditions change. When conditions change significantly, these documents should also change. The question before you tonight is whether conditions in the area around the subject property have changed enough to warrant changes to the Comprehensive Plan and to the Zoning Code. The Zoning Map shows the zoning classification of the subject property as R-1. A general rule of thumb in rezoning cases is that there are only two reasons to change a zone: (1) the current zoning was always incorrect and should be changed; or (2) the current zoning may have been appropriate at some point, but is no longer reasonable because of changes in the area. As for the comprehensive plan, it refers to the area in question as "...suitable for development of medical-related purposes as a PUD medical office and/or office residential complex.” The property is shown on the Comprehensive Plan Update Map as 'Office/Planned Unit Development.’ Mr. Harris restated that these documents are intended to be flexible, and that they should be monitored, reviewed and amended over the years as necessary. The question before the commissioners is whether the applicants have demonstrated to your satisfaction that conditions in the area around the subject property have changed sufficiently so that the suggested future land use shown in the comprehensive plan and the current zoning shown on the Zoning Map are no longer reasonable or suitable for the subject property and that changes to those documents are necessary or desirable. Attorney Stephen Giles, representing the Carpenter Trust for the purpose of this rezoning and also acting on behalf of Walmart Stores, Inc., then approached the podium. He stated that the request is for rezoning property at Vancouver and West Main Street. The total project site is 8.9 acres, with about 1/3 of that fronting on West Main and already zoned C-4, which would support the grocery store that is proposed for the site. The requested rezoning of 6 acres is to make adequate acreage zoned C-4 available to support this single user project. This is a unique situation in that tonight you have a user who will do the project that it proposes for this rezoning. We think the city can take comfort that whatever is proposed by Walmart for this site is going to be built with your input and citizen comments. We have been listening to the community and we have tried to put as many of their ideas into this plan as we could in order to present a very quality project to this great city. The location is at the intersection of principal arterial West Main Street and collector Vancouver. Our data shows this to be a prime location for a grocery store because it is adjacent to extensive residential areas, the residents of which will be customers of the store. The neighborhood markets are named that for a reason, in that they need to be near a neighborhood so people won’t have to drive all over town to do their shopping. The traffic numbers are what brought Walmart to this location and we request your vote to recommend approval to the City Council. Mr. Giles further stated that Walmart will do a very quality project and will have substantial landscaping that you will not see in any other commercial project in town. He also stated that proposed ingress and egress were more than adequate, and that Walmart would cover the costs associated with erecting a traffic signal at the corner of West Main Street and Vancouver. 4 Commissioner Perkins asked if a traffic study had been conducted on the impact of additional traffic from the south using Vancouver and what would happen to the traffic that would be going through the residential area on Vancouver? Mr. Giles said they had done a traffic study and it has been revised based on the new information and we have a traffic engineer that can answer that question, but the traffic increase will be very minimal going to the south. We believe most of the traffic will be coming from West Main Street back onto Main Street. Mr. Ernie Peters, of Peters & Associates Engineers in Little Rock, said his firm had done a comprehensive study on traffic volumes that are anticipated on Vancouver and that they have the ability to project what the volume will be for the proposed store and that it is based, in part, on data collected around the country from similar sites. This particular category is one that includes data tabulated by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a fairly comprehensive database and a reliable source for estimating what future traffic volumes are likely to be. A part of the study puts anticipated changes in volume into perspective based on current traffic volumes on Main Street, currently at approximately 19,000 vehicles per day. On Vancouver south of Main Street adjacent to the site the two way 24-hour traffic volumes are about 1,000 vehicles per day. As part of the study, we have estimated what we think the directional traffic patterns of the area will be, and what the origin and destination might be for the traffic that is coming to and departing the site. We have estimated for this site that 10% of site traffic would come and go on Vancouver. We anticipate a large portion of that traffic would be in the existing traffic stream of travelers already using Vancouver from the residential area to the south and going elsewhere to shop. Those trips might be shortened by using this site as their destination. The total site net trip count is estimated to be a little over 3,500 vehicle trips per day, counting them going in and going out. If our estimate is correct, that means about 350 trips on Vancouver at this location. The balance will be coming and going to Main Street either at the Utah intersections or at the Vancouver intersection. We have done capacity level service calculations for the intersection of Vancouver and Main and determined the current volumes are such that they do not warrant a traffic signal. The Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department would have to approve - with the city concurring - to warrant a signal at that location. If the proposed use is built, there will be a need for a signal and Walmart is agreeable to paying for and constructing a traffic signal at that location. We feel that will be beneficial not only to site-specific traffic, but also to residents on the north and south sides of Main Street at Vancouver wishing to enter or exit Main Street safely and conveniently. Commissioner Perkins asked if a physical O/D study had been done in the field. Mr. Peters said they had not done an Origin/Destination Study, but they had done detailed turning movement counts at West Main intersections with Vancouver and Utah where we physically have been onsite. We also have done the manual counts of how many vehicles are turning left, going straight, or turning right from all directions. Commissioner Hargus said he would like to see some kind of concept drawing of the anticipated layout. If you are going to have a traffic light there is it going to be for the 5 Walmart entrance or for Vancouver? Mr. Peters said the traffic signal would be on Main Street at Vancouver and site parking access would be off Vancouver and Utah. Commissioner Hargus said he had initially looked for a concept drawing of some sort that showed the parking and screening from the residential area and was concerned about lighting. Mr. Peters said he understands there is interest in knowing the details of that site plan. They want to make sure that presenting too much site plan information doesn’t violate the rezoning protocol. The detail of that site plan will be reviewed and presented to the city as part of the large-scale site plan development. Commissioner Perkins asked if there would be a left turn into Walmart off Main Street or would access only be from Vancouver? Mr. Peters said you will be able to turn left off of Main Street at Utah also. Utah is a platted street but will be vacated and become a driveway into the site. Following those remarks, Chairman Boyd opened the floor to the Public to speak for or against the request. Mr. H.L. Shepherd who lives in Colonial Heights acting on behalf of friends that have homes on West 2nd Place that backs up to the subject property. He read the following letter from Dean Strickland: One of the most important concerns of the entire neighbor surrounding the area in which Walmart wants to build a large store is traffic. Most of the people who live here are homeowners who bought or built their homes never dreaming that the City would ever rezone the area for a business such as Walmart. When the neighborhood was established, no sidewalks were constructed along the streets. There are absolutely no sidewalks anywhere on which people can walk or kids can ride bikes, therefore, people have to walk in the streets, and kids have to ride bikes in the streets. No one feels like they should walk or play on someone else's lawn. Now if a Walmart store is built in the area surrounded by family homes, can you imagine how much traffic will increase? It will be a nightmare! Where will people walk and kids ride bikes and play? One lady has already been hit by a car on Vancouver. When you vote please stop and consider how you would vote if you lived in the area? (For record only: Attached Letter) Mr. Shepherd also read a letter from Pat Garrett: The negative side of Walmart on West Main. (1) Currently zone is R-1. Why should that be changed? (2) Loss of home value which will affect all homes in neighborhood due to appraisers using comps from houses bordering Walmart property. (3) Noise. (4) Large trucks coming and going. (5) Traffic from South Main (Arkansas?) Street coming up through the residential areas to get to the store. Vancouver has just been designated as a bike route – how can you bike and/or walk with all the traffic? (6) Water – Parts of this area flood in big rains already. (a) Will dirt be brought in to build up the site further 6 adding to the water problems? (b) Where will all the water drain from the paved parking lot? (7) Lights – even though I have already been assured they will be directed away from homes and toward the store – you will still have a huge light “glow” from all those lights. Final important questions: (1) Would you ladies and gentlemen want a Walmart in your back yard? Be very honest in your evaluation. Would it deter you from buying one of our homes? (2) Secondly, should any of you recuse yourself from voting on this? Are you a supporter of Kroger and don’t want to see the store go in? Are you a big Walmart supporter or stock holder that would want to see the store go in? Think about it, what is the right thing for you to do, vote or recuse yourselves? Most of us are lifelong residents of Russellville and feel that we deserve better than this. We trust that the City will look out for our best interest, just as they would want someone to look out for their best interest in the same situation. (For record only: Attached Letter) Mr. Shepherd said Kroger is 13 blocks away and the grocery at the bottom of Skyline is 8 blocks away and he said he did not need one any closer. Mr. Gerald Hook, 2102 West 8th Street, 2 houses off South Vancouver. He stated he and his wife, Connie, are opposed to the Walmart Neighborhood Market and request the Planning Commission to deny the request. Their opposition is primarily because the store would greatly increase vehicle traffic on South Vancouver. He stated he did not oppose the market, but not at this location. He asked Walmart to withdraw their request. Mr. Jeff Terry asked the Planning Commission to vote for what is best for Russellville. Mr. John Peel, 2003 West 3rd Place, stated his concerns were the safety of his children due to increase in traffic. He asked the commission to consider what City Planner Harris had asked as to whether this R-1 was always incorrect and needed changing, or if it may have been right at some point, but changes in the area had rendered it no longer correct. Therefore, should the city change the R-1? Should the city throw away their 20-Year Comprehensive Development Plan? He also voiced concerns about potential loss of employment from existing business. Attorney Tim Murdock spoke on behalf of a couple of people who live immediately south of the property that would be affected. He stated he was concerned about the change in character of the area, the C-4 zone and its permitted uses, and the increase in traffic on Vancouver. He questioned the statements made about future traffic counts, impacts on property value, noise, and parking lot lighting. Mr. William Thornsberry, representing River Valley Realty and sellers of the property, said he was here to appeal to the commission's sense of fair play to the owners of that property. They have owned this land for years and over that period there have been many changes. People have tried to obtain and develop it, but the Carpenters always resisted any kind of development there. The owners did not want their property split up when Vancouver was put in. They wanted to keep the tract intact. The city offered them zero for splitting the property. Any developer knows that anytime you split a property 7 you hurt it. Mr. Thornsberry asked that the commission approve the rezoning to get them fair compensation for their property. Mrs. Margie Smith, Pinewood Subdivision, said she was concerned with the drainage, increase in traffic, safety for her grandchildren, and the impact on existing businesses. She asked the commission to keep the R-1 zoning. Mr. John Bynum, 2414 West 6th Street, stated his concerns with traffic congestion, increase in noise, impact on residential areas along Bradley Lane, Vancouver, and Honeysuckle Ave., increased crime, abandoned buildings, concerns of the character change in the area, and the decrease in value of the homes in this area. Mr. Bynum asked the commission to deny this request. Ms. Jane Dunn, West Second Place, stated she was opposed to rezoning R-1 to C-4 due to safety concerns, lighting, crime rate, increase in traffic, decease in value of homes, drainage issues, and the uses allowed in C-4 zone. Ms. Mary Tibbels, 223 South Vancouver, stated she was concerned with the traffic and speed at this time and whether it would worsen if Walmart goes in, and whether the flooding would worsen. She asked the commission to not approve the C-4. Mr. Larry Gulick, 2000 Bradley Lane, stated his concern was with loss of property value. Mr. Michael Terry, Kroger employee, stated his concern was the impact on the existing businesses and the loss of jobs. Ms. Rebecca Callaway, 516 South Vancouver, stated she was concerned with the 10% increase in traffic if the Walmart should come in and asked if anything positive would come out of this development if approved. Following Ms. Callaway’s comments, Chairman Boyd asked if there was anyone else that wanted to speak. No one else requested to speak. The chairman complimented the citizens on the way they presented their case this evening in a courteous and respectful way. He then asked if the commissioners had any questions for either the petitioner or city planner? No questions were asked. Commissioner Perkins made the motion to approve the request. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion. The motion failed with 0 voting for and 6 voting against; Westcott, Sims, Hargus, Smith, Davenport, and Perkins. Request Denied. The Third Order of Business: A request to review and recommend approval to the City Council for a Special Use Permit to allow car sales in a C-2, for property located at 2711 North Arkansas, submitted by Ray Black, Jr. (SP.12.07.113) Mr. Harris stated that the applicants had failed to provide proof of notification of adjoining property owners. Commissioners discussed whether to table or pull the 8 application. Alderman Larkin said Mr. Black had recently acquired Old Post Barbeque and had been very busy with renovations and he would be calling Mr. Harris. Commissioner Perkins made the motion to table until next month to give Mr. Black time to get his notification as required and contact Mr. Harris. Commissioner Hargus seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The Fourth Order of Business: A request to review and recommend approval to City Council for a Special Use Permit to allow a proposed warehouse expansion in a C-2 (Highway Commercial), located at Beacon Tire, 3838 East Main Street, submitted by Brent Abbott on behalf of A.J. Burk. (SP.12.08.114) Mr. Harris said this is an existing business on East Main. The applicant wants to increase their warehouse capacity. Mr. Abbott has agreed to provide screening across the back of the property to screen the adjoining neighborhood to the south. He has agreed to add inserts to an existing chain link fence (90% or higher screening value) and increase the detention pond volume. Any requirements for improvements to the drive and loading areas will be provided. Commissioner Perkins made the motion to approve. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hargus and passed unanimously. The Fifth Order of Business: A request to approve the Preliminary Plat of StoneBrook Park Addition located north of Fairway & North Utica Avenue submitted by Kurt Jones of Kurt Jones Engineering, on behalf of Brent Lacefield of Russellville Housing Partners, LP. (SD.12.08.254) Mr. Harris referred to the comments made at the Technical Review meeting that the commissioners requested that a stub-out be provided to the west side of development property. Current plat shows Utica and Verona taking access from Fairway and also stubbed-out on their north ends as well. A suggestion was made to continue East 10th as a stub-out to the west side. There were comments and questions re: provision of sidewalks and streetlights, and a request for clarification about the drainage plan. Commissioner Perkins asked Public Works Director Michael Oakes if he wanted an extension on 10th Street to the west. Director Oakes said one was discussed, but that the proposed assisted living center directly west of the subject property negated the need for a stub-out. Commissioner Perkins said there would be an open area between the two developments. Will that be a dead area unavailable for development? Kurt Jones said it is a narrow strip which varies in width from 100 feet to 150 feet. It is about 150 feet along Fairway but up along 10th Street it is very narrow. Mr. Jones said he did not see any advantage in having a road that is going to loop back to the west and 9 tie back into Fairway. There will be a small 'dead' area if the assisted-living facility is developed as planned. Mr. Harris raised the question again on sidewalks. He said the city is in a strange position in that current subdivision regulations would not require that sidewalks be provided in this development. However, the city is moving towards a situation where sidewalks would be required in every development. He asked if there was some way the developer could be encouraged to provide sidewalks at least on one side of the primary streets up to the 10th Street crossover. If none are provided the city could amend the zoning code by the time the developers apply for building permit so that sidewalks would be required on every lot. Mr. Jones said the current codes and ordinances do not require sidewalks. City Attorney Trey Smith said Mr. Harris' proposed action is not in the Land Subdivision and Development Code. Mr. Smith cited a case (Richardson v. Little Rock 1988), the findings of which he said reinforced that Mr. Harris’ proposed action would not withstand a legal challenge. He further stated that until sidewalk requirements are adopted by the City Council we cannot impose sidewalk. Commissioner Perkins made the motion to approve. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sims and passed unanimously. Alderman Mark Tripp said sidewalks are not a requirement but encouraged Mr. Lacefield to be a community partner. The city is presently working on sidewalks and should see code changes to that effect very soon. The Sixth Order of Business: A request to approve the Preliminary Plat of West End Village located in the 4200 Block of West Main Street submitted by Dave Garza on behalf of owner Wayne Nordin and developer West End Village Limited Partnership. (SD.12.08.255) Mr. Harris said this development was also discussed at Technical Review. One item discussed was provision of sidewalks. The developer has agreed to provide some sidewalks as shown on the plat. The drainage was also discussed. Commissioner Perkins said the drainage appears to come down North Ukiah to the corner. Is there some existing drainage way or something proposed to pick up that water? It comes off Main Street straight down to the intersection, but then what happens to it? Is there an inlet to carry it across? Commissioner Perkins said he assumed the city engineer had reviewed the drainage and was satisfied. Mr. Barrett said the required preliminary drainage report had been submitted, and that the final plans will be submitted next week. Water and sewer plans have been sent to City Corp for their review. Necessary paperwork will be submitted to the Arkansas Department of Health tomorrow morning. 10 Commissioner Hargus stated that he was an engineer, but that it would enhance his understanding of the plats if an engineering executive summary could be added to the packets to indicate that public works was comfortable with what was proposed. Director Oakes said he could give an executive summary that says 'I’ve looked at it and it’s doable, but I can’t tell you for sure how it is going to work.' He said he was confident with the Plat. He further stated that he had authority to either approve these plans or not, and that he would not approve plans that were not satisfactory. Commissioner Perkins made the motion to approve. Commissioner Hargus seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Adjourned. __________________ Chairman 11