Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Last City Council Meeting of 2012

Tonight we voted on approving a new drill zone within the existing drill sites on two different well locations, both well south of district 1.  I visited both sites yesterday and noted that they looked like industrial complexes in a residential area.  I noted on the staff report that they were supposed to have masonry walls on both sites and there were none.  The reason for this is that they were operating under the old ordinance for gas well drilling in Arlington.  That ordinance stated that the masonry walls were to be constructed after all wells were completed.  Since they were requesting at rezoning for the drill site they now have to comply with the new ordinance that states construction of the masonry walls had to be accomplished before the first well is drilled.  I stated my concerns to Cliff McCoskey who was the spokes person for the gas company.  Luckily the operator was at the meeting and I had him state for the record that masonry walls on both sites will be constructed by the end of the first quarter, with drilling operations estimated in July.  Knox boxes were installed and I observed them on site, and surveilance cameras will be installed by the end of the week.  All of my concerns were met and I voted for the new drill zones to be approved.  The operator is on record and I believe that he will comply fully. 

The other concern that I had was with a zoning request by an existing apartment complex.  This complex was constructed in 1964 and the smaller of the buildings had burned to the ground.  He was not in compliance with current zoning because his building was built before this zoning was required, thus operating in a non-conforming status.  Essentially he was asking us to grant him privileges outside of the current ordinance.  We voted not to hear his request.  He should never have been before the council to begin with, and his request was simply wasting our time.

Lastly, several citizens voiced their opposition concerning a house located at 612 Crown Colony.  It is a seven bedroom house that is vacant and rented on short term options.  It has become animal house, with parties, drinking and behavior that is considered disruptive to the neighborhood.  The owner doesn't care and is unwilling to meet with the neighbors and discuss their concerns.  Bill Adams is the next door neighbor and he has lived there for the last 30 years.  He has had enough and will put his house on the market on 1 January.  Citizen outrage was obvious to the council.  They are appealing to the councils sense of decency to do something about this problem.  To this point I have carried their water and introduced the problem to the Community and Neighborhood Development Committee.  The next step will be a citizens initiative to circulate a petition for more participation on this issue.


  1. Was the vote to not hear the request of the apartment owner unanimous? I hope it was.

  2. Yes it was unanimous. Essentially the guy was asking us the violate the current ordinance in his favor for some unknown reason.

  3. there was no discussion on the apartment public hearing request, just a motion to deny, which passed 8-0.

    what is scary is that P&Z denied by a mere 4-2 vote.

  4. Your right Richard. That bothered me also. I would like to know who the two were that voted the way they did and why. I went over to the apartments and saw first hand the condition of these apartments. They are cracker boxes in the true sense of the term. Current code requires 750 sq/ft for a single family. These are around 350 sq/ft. His request was to build a new building outside of current MF22 zoning. I don't understand where the members of P&Z were going with this request. The apartments are currently operating in a non-conforming status already, so I don't know why it was passed to us, but it was.


Thank you for your comment.