Agenda - 04-05-2011 - 7a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

l ~~~1~' J~ Brian Crawford: There are members of 'the public here that wanted to speak and not just observe the mee~ng. I'd like to get them a few minutes each just to make a statement to us. I know that we've already voted, I don't know if it would have impacted that but I still would like fio give them an opportunity to speak because they did sign in. I didn't check the sheet so my apologies to the public far that. Bonnie . lauser: First I v~ant to thank you because what you did with Attachment ~ salved everything far us. Sa l wanfi to thank you for that and I grant to thank you in the context of there is a bigger issue that you are ail committed to but l am not sure that we are in agreement that it works the same way and that's how the UDO links to the Comprehensive Plan, I will start by saying the UDC is legally binding and the Comprehensive Plan, as we all know, is nat. If you look at MPD-CZ closely, you would see that it allowed a whole list of permitted uses, put in light, medium, and heavy industrial, that had they been approved they could allow a use in the County that would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Naw, you all say and you all agree that the current Board as it sits would be unlikely to approve it but only takes four votes to permit a use that would be inconsistent with the Gamprehensive Plan sa as we move into Phase 2, we would ask for maybe some more precise def~nitians of what is allowed in these the Conditional Districts so that they don't allow things that would be so blatantly inconsistent with fihe Comprehensive Plan. That said, we really appreciate it, l will write a letter to the Board tomorrow saying that we support the recommendations of the Planning Board and want to thank you. Marilee McTigue: I have na comment. Thank you for work an this, [ do appreciate it. Linda Finch; I also want to commend you, I think you've had an incredibly difficult task and really the public does understand the push and pull between all three bodies, the staff that has worked sa hard, Planning Board, thankless task, I do think it is very unusual that a major planning ordinance like this is passed with a crass aver with very lifitle definition to the public and then we are expected to take on, faith that in Phase Z our concerns are going to be picked up. I think, unfortunately, getting that information late I realize that the packet didn't even include my two letters from two days ago that I issued to the Commissioners but I would hope that very sawn we could see a comprehensive list ofthe issues that you have agreed will go forward into Phase ~ so that we can start thinking about what work is going to be dare in the future. Again, thank you sa much far letting us address you this evening. Dolly Hunter. I just really wish you that in Phase ~ you can address the size of the landscape ma#erial. In the existing Ordinance it is wonderful, you talk to any landscaper and what is purposed, the larger size, they don't survive as well, they cost two to three times mare, my main question is will you address that in Phase ~? Craig Benedict I am not the one to make guarantees, we will have that on our list. That did become part of the public record. Brian Crawford: we'll make sure it's on the list, Larry vUright: May I say something to the public in general? It has been said here many times, we are volunteers and what I just heard tonight comes from other people that have studied or are studying this as Weil as we are and I have been an same pretty serious projects on this Board and it sure helps to hear comments like this and to bring this to us with documentation in Section 5.3.2 ar whateverit is, sa we can take a look. More people studying this helps us immensely. Pete Hallenbeck: I'd like to make same general comments and observations that I think would be goad to have in the record. Ct will be brief. I think tonight we looked at changes in the UD4 to accommodate the interpretations that people had and we looked at explicitly stating things that could be concluded by looking at bath the Ordinances and the Gamprehensive Plan, I am glad that we stayed with having the global directives in there just once and not trying to unfactor it if you will from a mathematical point of view. The second thing is l am tram the Cheeks Township and I've talked with a lot of people there and one thing that I was wrestling with particularly with the public comment was the concept and def nit[on of Rural Community with all the people that stood up and all the different views we gat and in my mind itwas a little breakthrough but it suddenly hit me that there is na Rural Community per say. It's not a homogenous entity, we have a number of rural communities throughout the Gaunty and it makes it difficult sometimes to take public comments and interpret it. You have to somehow tie it back to the communities and what their concerns are. That is just something that I was battling with. The next thing is that the chark on page 15 of this presentation that has the Conditions[ Districts defnitians, on Monday"s presentation, I lave the way Craig presented it and I think that chart is under appreciated. Perhaps by us and perhaps sometimes by the public, I think it is a great explanation of it and the concept of more general, more specific, less and more, speculation really put the differences in all the types of Ganditional Zoning into very good general focus. A lot of the time when I was listening to people having concerns about specifics with Conditional Zoning, that chart let me put that in perspective. I think a lot of what we are seeing here with the public discussion and Commissioner comments is a battle of flexibility versus rig[dness in zoning ordinances and people have to weigh the advantages and risks of that. The Ganditional Use is very specific, it's very ~exible but it runs the risk that somebody could go off in one area an plop something down and when I hear all the concerns about the boating zones that land somewhere and do something bad, it seems I~