|
<br />2
<br />action. For what you have to do now, you’re going right down the right road. But I think there’s a bigger issue out there that 54
<br />needs to be portrayed. And frankly, if it had embarrassed the judge a little bit it might be a good idea. 55
<br /> 56
<br />Michael Harvey: One other observation I feel compelled to make, I don’t think that there’s any staff person in this room that 57
<br />didn’t feel that we had a road path to success when we started this. I think we’re a little concerned we no longer have that path 58
<br />and we need to kind of refocus and figure out where we’re going it. It’s one of those, “Well, I thought we were all on the same 59
<br />page” and I personally believe that if we get a better product out it, great. We don’t need to waste your time. Our time’s not 60
<br />wasted doing this work because hat’s what we’re here for. But our goal isn’t to make this unnecessarily complicated. But as 61
<br />you all know, in the last two years, things can get over necessarily complicated for reasons that defy explanation. So we will 62
<br />continue to work to weather that storm and thank you all for your patience for that. 63
<br /> 64
<br />Lydia Wegman: How are you going to identify all the new exclusions? 65
<br /> 66
<br />Craig Benedict: We have to list them. 67
<br /> 68
<br />Lydia Wegman: I know, but inaudible. 69
<br /> 70
<br />Tony Blake: But since things are changing then new ones might be invented. And that’s the one that concerns me, is things 71
<br />that you haven’t even thought of… 72
<br /> 73
<br />Michael Harvey: Well, and that’s a good point. But I will remind you of what you and I have both said, on several occasions. 74
<br />The UDO is a living, breathing document. And it is designed to have to be modified. And it is designed to have things taken 75
<br />from it, added to it. You know, there’s a land use now sweeping the nation that it’s an entertainment facility where you pay a 76
<br />lot of money and you’re going into separate rooms and it’s a puzzle you’re solving. Well, we don’t have that listed in the table 77
<br />of permitted uses anywhere. I think that the attorneys’ point, which is valid, is that we don’t necessarily believe that as we may 78
<br />have six months ago that Byrd requires you to list this use specifically. Maybe we can get away with. Inaudible. Well, this or… 79
<br />And to not put too fine of a point on it, because this is again part of what we’re going to be re-engaging the attorneys with. 80
<br />Remember Health Services? It just goes from 0-10,000 and over 10,000. Well, one of the comments that we’re going to be 81
<br />making to the attorneys office is, ok if you’re comfort level is you ensure that the definition of health services is fairly detailed in 82
<br />terms of what it means and the current definition talks about physicians, medical care, whatnot, and say health services 0-10, 83
<br />10,001-19,999, and then 20,000 and over and these are the districts they can go in. And you’ve got a definition that says here 84
<br />are the examples. It’s much the same vein with rec that we just did. If that serves as legal sufficiency and then yes may be 85
<br />under there, you’ve got two or three that you just know there’s just now way on… I’m just throwing out an example, you list 86
<br />podiatry nowhere. If that’s where we’re headed with this, as long as you’re comfortable, we had sort of started down that path 87
<br />originally and then we’re led to believe that that may not be necessarily sufficient. We’re happy to go back to it. But whatever 88
<br />path we take, our table of permitted uses is going to have to be tweaked, it’s going to have to be updated, it is woefully out of 89
<br />date. One example that I’ve heard several of you mention to me, both in meetings and privately, how do handle assisted 90
<br />living? How do you handle nursing homes? How do you do this, how do you do that? Well it’s kind of all fallen under the whole 91
<br />guise of health services. Well, no it doesn’t. And yeah, these are the kind of things we are going to have to be a little more 92
<br />specific on and I think that’s James’ ultimate point. So we look forward to re-engaging with the attorney’s office. We look 93
<br />forward to getting you all back additional information, and I think that this is purposeful. I think this document at least provides 94
<br />you the linkage you were looking for from the last meeting, how does NAKES fit with some of our existing land uses, and how 95
<br />do other lists work, and really there’s only two lists. And my concern with one of the lists is it’s incredibly nebulous. And my 96
<br />concern with the other list is it is too verbose. 97
<br /> 98
<br />Tony Blake: So my concrete example, and this is from my… I was born before automatic teller machines. And the banking use 99
<br />probably went into these land uses, but now you can plop an ATM in the middle of a parking lot. What in this process, and 100
<br />somewhere in the process there has to be a change control or something like that built in so that you can adapt to these sorts 101
<br />of technological changes or social changes, and allow for these things but maybe not a full service bank? There’s more and 102
<br />more fragmentation going on in certain areas and there’s more and more consolidation going on in other areas. It’s very hard 103
<br />to keep up with. It’s such a dynamic thing. 104
<br /> 105
<br />Michael Harvey: I don’t disagree with that at all. 106
<br /> 107
<br /> 9
|