Agenda 06-04-2019 6-a - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application

Browse Search

100 Kim Piracci: I would like to make a little speech to the Planning Board. I know there's a question of legality, but I also have a conscious. If there's one thing I'm conversant on is climate mitigation. This development is everything that doesn't address what we need addressed moving forward. Any language,that I have in quotes"properly protect the environment"are hollow words. This area except for that original homestead area is completely wooded and it's the very definition of urban sprawl. One inch of rain in 24 hours is something in the past year we've probably gotten once a week or more. Who is going to get hurt from that? Are people going to start being hurt? Mr. Smith admitted that the intersection will be dangerous, not his word, mine, but I think his word was difficult. Turning left out of that development, not so good. There's no affordable housing and that's for reasons beyond our discussion, but it's not good. It's not a good thing to be building so much expensive housing in this one area without building the other kind of housing. There's no mention of green building strategies of any kind, lead building or solar panels. I'm going to vote no on this. Hunter Spitzer: Michael, you said that we could recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that they investigate increasing the one inch in 24 hours rainfall requirement that they also be required to mitigate a more extreme event. How would be go about making such a request? Michael Harvey: I think you would do it after you have made some sort of motion (on this application). The motion can be made that the County Commissioners be asked to initiate a study on the impacts of increasing the stormwater design threshold for developments. I'm going to remind you that that's not just new development that's any existing property owner who exceeds the established thresholds would then have to abide by that standard. Be forewarned of some of the issues that we're going to be bringing back to you in terms of the pros and cons because as I indicated there's opportunities and constraints, but I think that once you've concluded action on this particular project, someone can make a motion to ask the County Commissioners to direct staff to begin a comprehensive assessment of additional stormwater opportunities. Patrick Mallett: If you start evaluating the existing wells around the perimeter and you find things that would cause them to have to be modified,these would have to be enforced. You could be looking at wells that are condemned. I would also reiterate his analogy with regard to the difference in standards over time. Zelda Lockhart: As a person who is being spoken about who might therefore be further impacted. If my well is inspected now and then hypothetically needs work,that's still a win,win for everybody. Let's say that the drinking water isn't as great as I think it is. If the developer has to pay for that to see the condition of my well, and they find out it's not in as great condition as they thought, I don't lose. I'm good with that. David Blankfard: So you would have to pay for your own well to be upgraded if found deficient. Zelda Lockhart: If it was found deficient. I think that argument is being put over as almost a shadow over the concern that I have. That is not a concern. So, if I understand what Michael is saying, he is saying that if there was something put in place to assure that the development, the construction of the development, and the digging of the wells in some way condemned my well,that that's not something similar as to who could know what condemned my well. I think that's what the argument is. That doesn't take away my concern. If I have my tap on today and then tomorrow begins the pounding into the wells, I think it is a pretty good legal argument that there's a cause and effect. The aquafers don't just run one day and go dry the next. What I'm saying is that that secondary argument of now you wouldn't want those citizens to have to go paying for better drinking water now;would you? That's a shadow on top of the issue that I'm raising. Kim Piracci: I'm kind of agreeing with her. I was thinking, there's a downside to knowing if I have bad water? If I had bad water I would want to know about it. Patrick Mallett: What I'm saying is that Michael and Phil and the discussion last month pointed out that part of that investigation could reveal deficiencies that have to be resolved. Kim Piracci: And what's the downside of that?