Minutes 10-04-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Commissioner Gordon: I want to hear what the Attorney says too. At some point we have to enter into the record all of the materials in this abstract. What would be the implications if we don't close the public hearing and go through and try to make these findings and then close the public hearing at the end. Usually we don't do that. I guess I would ask the Attorney if we were concerned that maybe folks might have a question that would come up but we could not get an answer as the hearing was closed. John Roberts: You do violate the process if you don't close the public hearing. Normally, and this is not just Orange County, Board of Commissioners that are having this type of hearing close the public hearing before they conduct their deliberations because deliberations are not the point where you want public input. It's the Board exclusively that conducts the deliberations. That's the reason for that. Commissioner Gordon: So I guess the question that could come up is when you get into these changes. I think you've made it clear about the word changes suggested by the applicant, and that is on this sheet. But exactly how you handle the sidewalks or exactly how you handle word-smithing, I'm still not clear. So I guess I still have those questions. Michael Harvey: From my standpoint, there are two issues —the word-smithing is easy from my standpoint. Staff has no objection to the corrections or to the grammar suggested by the applicant. You could recommend to approve the 74 conditions with the changes requested by the applicant as articulated with the October 4, 2011 letter as agreed to by staff. That satisfies that issue. With respect to the sidewalks, you have a recommended condition by the Planning Board that essentially states that they encourage the development of sidewalks within the right-of-way so long as the applicant is not required to install them or absorb the expense for them and that the homeowner's association that will be formed will not be required to accept perpetual maintenance or upkeep costs. That is for the Board to determine how to proceed. I will also add, however, that all conditions with this type of permit are required to be mutually agreed to, and if you modify one of the conditions, the applicant has to agree with it. Commissioner Gordon: Can I just follow up. Please clarify the process if the applicant can't agree to it and we've already closed the hearing. Commissioner Yuhasz: Let me ask a question. Are there any issues involved in this application and the findings of the Planning Board other than the sidewalks that are concern to any of the Commissioners? There were none. John Roberts: That's a good way to handle that. My comment is just going to be on the sidewalks. I think you may want to have some discussion on that issue. Right now what the applicant has agreed to is either no sidewalks or sidewalks constructed and perpetually maintained by a third party. Staff can't take a position on that, but I think we could ask staff the question if any third party has stepped up and volunteered to perpetually maintain the sidewalk. That would mean it's the County. If the County is not intending to perpetually maintain these sidewalks and construct them, then the applicant has agreed to accept no sidewalk as a condition. So if you wanted to strike condition #15 on page 124, you'd be fine.