Agenda - 09-18-2012 - 6b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

80 Beth Trahos: This Special Use Permit process is different than the ordinary process so I want to clarify how the process is handled at the Planning Board level. That at the BOCC level, my understanding is that the testimony is sworn and there has to be a showing of a special impact by a person who would speak on the project. I wasn't sure if those rules were enforced at the Planning Board level and if they are not, I want to note it. Larry Wright: Your point is well taken but I am going to address it in a different way. Beth Trahos: The process requires that we either object or lose our opportunity to do so. John McGuire: These are all the things I would hope the Board has considered. You know the rules better than I do. I would hope the forethought goes into it is just not this piece of property that is going forward but what happens, when the requirements are in place to protect not only the landowner but the business owner. Does the landowner know what if nothing happens, and it reverts back, are they responsible for the fixtures on the property? Who takes care of that? The planning commission defines what those requirements are and so if you don't know the answer to those questions, I would think you would have to pass on this proposal until the definitions are in place. Larry Wright: I have served on this Planning Board a long time and I've helped in drafting the Comprehensive Plan and a lot of your concerns are addressed in there and I think there is a lot more protection than you realize in many of the concerns that you have. What I would like to do is, Mr. Harvey has a very strong command of all the ordinances and what can be done and what cannot be done and I think a lot of that would address your concerns. I think they are valid. It would be good to talk to Mr. Harvey. Michael Harvey: I would encourage Mr. McGuire to submit these concerns in writing in order to be compliant with Section 2.7.8(3) of the UDO. They have to be in writing to be part of the record. This will not be industrial use of property; this will be a public utility use of property as defined by our Unified Development Ordinance. This type of activity is a permitted use of property within all the zoning districts throughout the County subject to the review and approval of this Special Use Permit. There are standards they have to abide by concerning the use of this property. If this facility becomes defunct, the requirements of the ordinance are that the Special Use Permit is vacated. If the activity ceases, they would have to eliminate the use. Obviously the Bradshaw family partnership is informed because they have submitted documentation as part of the quarterly public hearing packet and they have agreed to allow the development to move forward on their property. I understand the concern but ultimately you are looking at, by definition, a permitted use in this area subject to review and approval of this permit through this very process. There is no rezoning taking place. This property will continue to be zoned Agricultural Residential. This activity is permitted. It is not considered an industrial use. This is a permitted use in this district subject to the issuance of this permit. If this permit doesn't get issued this use can't be developed. John McGuire: The purpose of defining planning requirements for the County should go beyond whoever is on the BOCC or the Planning Board. It should set guidelines for the direction the County is going to go and not based on the whims of whoever is in charge. Larry Wright: I think you really need to talk to Michael and we do have a 2030 Comprehensive Plan that we worked on for a few years and this does project where the County wants to go up to 2030 and so I think that it would be good for you to make an appointment with Michael and I encourage you to put your concerns in writing so that can go before the BOCC, all we do here is make recommendations. We are not a commission,we are a planning board. Tony Blake: Are you a resident of the community in the White Cross area? John McGuire: Yes, in the White Cross area. Larry Wright: Other questions? Beth Trahos: I would like to tender our objection as part of the record to the statements made by Mr. McGuire.