Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2006

Home

November 25, 2005 -- Page 3 of Olive Branch. The proposed sales yard would store and distribute cmshed stt~ne. [n its application, it made some concessions to creating a low impact on the surrounding neighborhood, including routing its trucks along a longer route. After a hearing, the city voted to deny the permit. Vulcan sued, and the court ruled in the city's favor. Vulcan appealed, arguing that the city's decision was arbitrary and ca- pricious. DECISION:Att~rmed, The city's denial was supported by substantial evidence. Although Vulcan provided witnesses to the contrary, neighboring residen- tial property owners objected to Vulcan's proposed use, asserting that it would decrease property values. Property owners noted that there would be no guarantee that the trucks coming in and out of the facility would follow the longer suggested mute, as opposed to taking the shorter route through the residential area. They also expressed concerns about the additional traffic, odors, and noise that the pro- posed plant would generate. The city's stated reasons for denial were that Vulcafi failed to show that the character of the neighborhood would not be affected, and that there would not be an adverse impact on traffic and safety. These were findings of fact, and as such, were binding upon a court when supported by substantial evidence. see also: Hearne v. City of Brookhaven, 822 So.2d 999 (2002). see also: Mayor and Board of Aldermen v. Hudson, 774 So.2d 448 (2000). Injunction -- City tries to build its sewage plant in neighboring city Neighboring city asks court for permanent injunction against project Citation: City of Dover v. City of Russellville, Supreme Court of Arkansas, No. 04-1112 (2005) ARKANSAS (10/13/05) --The city of Dover found 14 acres within one mile of the Russellville city limits that were suitable for the construction of a sewage plant. Accordingly, Dover bought the property and began soil work in prepara- tion for construction. Russellville wanted to halt construction, and annexed the subject property into its city limits. Russellville sued, claiming that the plant was a nuisance. The court ruled in its favor, and granted it a permanent injunction, or a court order, against the proposed plant. Dover appealed, m'guing that the proposed plant was not a nuisance, and that the court could nor issue an injunction until the plant was in operation and proven a nuisance in fact. © 2005 Quinlan Publisining Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please carl (617) 5424048. 117