Agenda - 09-01-2009 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 8/5/09 ~A Mark Marcoplos: Well, you're proposing to change it by this.... Michael Harvey: I am proposing to amend the Zoning Ordinance where there is currently a prohibition to stipulate that in areas where you have a node, that non-residential will be allowed in established nodes based on established limitations. Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: What Mark is proposing is to follow the recommendation to change but not the entire node. Just a very small piece in there. Michael Harvey: In my opinion you can't do that You can't differentiate property within the node as being more acceptable. That will not work with this amendment. What you are talking about is simply changing the critical watershed boundary line. Judith Wegner: IYs a multi-phase aspect. Michael Harvey: You have a node boundary as it exist right now. In order to exclude that intersection you essentially have to amend the watershed boundary line in order to free that area up to allow for non-residential development. Mark Marcoptos: Now wait a second, that cannot be true because if this is being passed to apply to this area, that is being done without changing the watershed overlay, right? Michael Harvey: That's because we are proposing to amend Article Six (6) which is the watershed protection overlay district to allow for non-residential development within various critical and protected watersheds where a node exists. You are right we are not changing the line of the critical watershed, we are just saying that within various critical and protected watersheds, if there is anode, the node can be developed consistent with the ordinance. What you are saying is that you will allow a small portion, not the entire node, to be developed for non-residential land uses. In my opinion that proposal essentially discriminates against seventy-five percent (75%) of the existing node within the critical watershed by allowing twenty-five percent (25°~) of property owners to have the benefit of being able to develop non-residential land uses on their property. In my opinion you either have to change the watershed boundary to allow the properties you are referring to in order to develop non-residential land uses or the whole node gets the same benefit of this amendment. Mark Marcoplos: I guess I don't buy into the legality of the whole node has to be addressed. What I am saying is the watershed boundary doesn't change either way. Michael Harvey: It would have to change with your recommended solution. In my opinion you cannot apply staff's proposed amendment to only a specific portion of the node. There is no data to justify that proposal in my opinion. Perdita Holtz: Mark, you're recommending changing the proposed language to say except within a porton of Cedar Grove node established by some boundary to be determined. Mark Marcoplos: Yes, it down around the intersection. For now, then look at the rest of it and figure out what ought to happen away from the intersection. Judith Wegner: Can you conceptualize it as phases and that is the first phase. Mark Marcoplos: Exactly. Perdita Holtz: That sets serious precedence for tampering with one small aspect of the various nodes. Michael Harvey: I am sorry, I still do not think we can do that. Mary Bobbitt-Cooke: But the reality is if you see one node, you'll only see one node, all of these nodes are different, unique in character, history, culture, watershed issues and I think it should a prerogative to get to know them well enough to say does it need tinkering or do we have to give everybody the same shoes to wear. Earl McKee: I can understand what Mark is saying but the problem I see with it by, let's call it tinkering with this one little section, you're inviting someone in Little River to want to do the same thing with part of their node or any other node in the County. You're inviting people to want special consideration for their particular profit I can see it being used by individuals or developers and corporations to insist that you have changed one little section in the Cedar Grove Node and made it special, then I want it done in this section too. 7