OCPB agenda 080316 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Craig Benedict: Just to add, SUP’s are typically associated with certain uses that, based on their nature, need 166 additional review. So let’s say, an asphalt mixing plant will still be a SUP. The criteria that we had in here was unique, 167 it was based on an acre size and not on the use and was based on the square footage of a building size. Which a 168 20,000 square foot medical building probably doesn’t have the same scrutiny that a 20,000 square foot different use. 169 But if it is a 20,000 corporate asphalt mixing plant it still has to go through the SUP process. So we’re getting rid of 170 two criteria that were based on acreage and square footage, which are not your normal SUP criteria. So we’re going 171 back to more of a conventional standardization of why you have a special use, and that’s usually because the 172 operation might have glare, noise, a lot of traffic, that type of stuff will put you in a SUP category. 173 174 Lydia Wegman: Just for the record, I’m not comfortable with the elimination of the Class A SUP. It still makes me 175 uncomfortable… So I would just suggest that you provide a little further explanation about why that makes sense. I 176 understand why it makes sense from a development standpoint but why it’s not going to be harmful. 177 178 Perdita Holtz: Well these areas that would be zoned, EDH-3, 4 and 5 are not near residences. 179 180 Lydia Wegman: Ok. 181 182 Craig Benedict: The two amendments she was talking about with the zoning, some are called text amendments and 183 that’s everything that she’s doing with EDH-3 and changes the uses and the floor area ratios; all those are 184 considered text amendments. And the other type of zoning amendment changes is a map amendment. That’s where 185 you’re actually going from EDH-2 and making it EDH-3. So that’s how they’re separate. 186 187 *************************************************** 188 257