OCPB agenda 010913 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

D R A F T 6 you would see more people walking on what are now less traveled side streets. The ordinance changes attempt to 266 deal with this problem, but does not do so as clearly as it does for the Interstate overlay area. 267 268 Perhaps the answer is to require sidewalks that will keep people off the streets, but not require sidewalks internal to 269 the project. This will allow for a slow development of a sidewalk system in the area as development occurs. 270 271 In the Interstate overlay, the goal of (10) in section 6.6.3 is to avoid the problems that currently exists with people 272 walking on US70 on other roads, such as Mt. Willing, as the area grows. The wording assure a review of these 273 concerns, but also allows for project specific discretion. 274 275 Note that as always there is the conflict of wanting sidewalks for safety and aesthetics being in conflict with the desire 276 for affordable housing. Even the comprehensive plan wrestles with this one. 277 278 Citizen Comment on the Changes: 279 280 A citizen from Efland commented that most people in Efland would not understand the changes, and that they did not 281 understand what had been going on. I remember the early community meetings, and 30+ people showed up. Most 282 were interested in getting sewer into the area. They were told that with sewer comes increased development and 283 business, which was welcomed by most. They were also told that there would be zoning changes due to the pending 284 development. Once the sewer project was on track, many citizens stopped showing up at the meetings. 285 286 Most residents also wanted to see opportunities for more businesses in the area, and commented that no new 287 businesses had been allowed for years. The proposed changes allow for more bushiness in the area. 288 289 The small area plan and subsequent small area implementation group has been an 8+ year process that was always 290 open to the public. There have been many opportunities for community feedback. I have personally discussed the 291 changes with many at the Fire Department. I sympathize with the average citizen reading zoning ordinance text and 292 trying to understand it, but I feel there has been plenty of opportunity for citizens to ask and receive a “plain English” 293 description of what the overall goals are. It should also be noted that only 10 citizens showed up at the meeting to go 294 over the changes. The opportunity was there. 295 296 The citizen made the comment that these changes will not be of much benefit to the community (or words to that 297 effect) and I disagree. These changes allow for new businesses, small professional businesses, and large scale 298 development near the interstate. While there may be some style issues, such as monument style signs for a 299 business instead of pole signs, the overall goals are consistent with the wishes of the community. 300 301 All that said, I would be delighted to schedule a meeting with any concerned group and talk to them about these 302 changes. 303 304 305 Agenda Item 8: Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendment – To make a recommendation 306 to the BOCC on government-initiated amendments to the text of the UDO in order to modify 307 and clarify existing regulations and definitions associated with the erection and use of 308 outdoor lighting facilities. This item was heard at the November 19, 2013 quarterly public 309 hearing 310 Presenter: Michael Harvey, Current Planning 311 312 Pete Hallenbeck submitted the following comments for the record: 313 314 Item 8: Outdoor Lighting 315 316 My only comment here is that perhaps the best description of the term “Initial Lumens” would be the lumens of output 317 for a bulb as printed on the packaging for the bulb. 318 10