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

Browse Search

139 ~.- ..»~ ~~A r~~ ~~~~e~~; ~~~~~~~, ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~* ~~~ ~u~~~~ ~~a~~~~ er~ail ....___Oxiginal Message---~~ From: Lee ~afalow ~t~ailta :1mxCrafalow. coma Sent: i~anday, February ~~, ~~1~, ~;a~ ~~ ~'a: Bexnadette ~elissier~ Steve ~uhas~- valerie ~oushee~ ~~,ice ~ax~~n; dam ~ernmingex ~~xternal~ ; Barry ~`acvbs; ~ar~. ~ic~ee Cc : ~'xs.nk Clifton; canna Baker subs ect : C~~4 Bubl~.a ~ear~.ng Dear ~xange County Cor~r~zssioner; ~nfort~unately~ I a~n unable to attend tonight's public hearing but ~ do have a couple of Gancerns that z hope you will take into coz~siderat~.on. I an disa.ppo.inted that ~.n the ~~C meetings we were told several. times that th~.s phase of the L~0 development process was s~.mply to consolidate existing ord~.nances and that na new pxopasals wau~,d be ~.neluded ix~ this first phase. ~n scanning some sect.~ans a.f the ~ropased ordin.anCe! th~.s is cleax~.y not the case. But s~.n.Ge I don ~ t recall the sauxces of that infaxmat.ian and since it appeaxs to be a moot point now, I wau~.d only asks if you haven't done sa already, that the staff be r~ireCted to never' make such a claim in its interacta,on r~ith volunteer boards and the public at large, icy pra.nGiple concern about the portions of the props~sed ~xdinance that I have had the opportunity to read is w~.th the new designation of Conditional Distr~.cts. 'here appeaxs to be virtually no limit to where these districts can be placed. Surely the~'e are areas of the Ca~znty and faint pXanning jurisdicta,ons that we know are not apprapr~.ate fc~r these uses and others where we believe it might be apprapr~.ate far such rises. ~y reading Qf the proposed ~xdinance iridi~ates that there is a~.ways a pub~.ic hearing and that even far the Cam, the process has a phase in which the ~CCC is N~?`~ acting as a guas~.-judicial body and, thereforer the ne~.ghbors and general public will have adequate opportunity to make themselves heard. If this is not the ease, then these Cond~.tic~na~. Districts da not serve the p-ubla.G interest in that there is very limited opportunity for public input into what are .and use decisions and not speca.al uses in permitted distr~.cts. the ~~.ip side of this concern is that~~-again if my reading is correct-~Condit~.ona,l Distr~.cts do not serve to expedite the development process for new bus~.ness oppartun~.ties. when s.ttempting to be placed ~.n areas where there is no consensus supporting that placement, the applicant may be bogged dawn in a drawn~QUt land use decis~,an. ~ better approach, x believe, wa~.ld be to be clear in genera, 2aning d~,stricts about appropxz~te uses and make efforts to include the publ~.c in those legislative decis~.ans. 'then, when specific propQsa~.s cone forward, have the staf f work with the deve~.oper to expedite the process with the Confidence that the use zs supported though, perhaps, with some can~ditians. It may take same work to came up with these general caning districts and uses, but the publa,c will be better served by bath a fair and open process and an expedited process that helps to promote new business. Lee Raf a~.ow membax, economic Development Cotnr~issxan