OCPB agenda 070115 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

place a rule that makes it clear what a developer establishing what a developer can and cannot do would be a better 1 solution than potentially allowing more run off into the most protected areas of the county. 2 3 Tony Blake: I completely agree. The developer did not disclose what the ramifications are and it would have affected 4 his lot prices. I tend to think to put the onus back on the developer to disclose this impervious surface ratio or what have 5 you to the homeowner… 6 7 Michael Harvey: Respectfully you don’t know that what you are suggesting didn’t occur. This is a project platted almost 8 10 years ago and none of us, including staff, was involved in any discussion between the developer and potential 9 property owners. 10 11 Tony Blake: I am focusing on the loop hole that this project took advantage of. If it is a matter of record, in the closing, 12 that this is disclosed, problem solved in my mind. 13 14 Herman Staats: I agree. I would be in favor or proper and effective disclosure and communication but if, for these 15 impervious surface exceptions, if they are engineering correctly, why would they be a determent to the environment. 16 17 Lisa Stuckey: I am concerned about what the state will call a BMP. I don’t have enormous confidence in our state’s 18 ability to protect the environment. I haven’t heard of other instances with the rules as they are currently and I don’t 19 know why that should be a basis of changing the rules. 20 21 Paul Guthrie: Let me tell you why I stirred it up. If you read the teacher tenure reading ruling in the state’s courts, they 22 are taking notice of issues of contract. It seems to be that someone that didn’t receive notice of limitation that they 23 eventually wanted to change could not go into court against the whole rule as a taking without due process so I think we 24 need to be very careful how the administration and the language that is used as setup this system on limits on property 25 knowing that down the road, it may or may not be transferred in a way the next buyer understands what the limits on 26 the property are. We need to be as clear as we can. Is our system providing due process? 27 28 Herman Staats: In this example of what we are not supposed to be focusing on but we are, the owner was the 29 developer and he did so he knew what he was doing so it wasn’t something taken away from him, he is the one who did 30 it, he was the owner. 31 32 Lisa Stuckey: What is being recommending is giving not a taking. 33 34 Paul Guthrie: In the specific case you are talking about is that offended buyer could go after both the owner and the 35 legal authority that is running it. I was concerned how we can document that people can, with due diligence, what the 36 property is limited too or not limited to. 37 38 Craig Benedict: The County has a recorded document that lists the development restrictions in that lot in writing. The 39 plat has it and the declaration of restrictions has it as well. 40 41 Pete Hallenbeck: We have all these exceptions, etc. and for a normal person buying a house, they will not wrap their 42 head around those details unless they have been bitten in the past. 43 44 Lisa Stuckey: How big a problem is it? 45 46 Pete Hallenbeck: It is unlikely this is the first person who has run into this. 47 48 17