3.8.23 PB Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 4 - 5 - 23 166 Brian Collie : That is correct, that green area that sprawls over across onto this property is for the White Cross School . 167 168 Lamar Proctor: It' s for the school then it goes off in a line and that follows a stream . . . 169 170 Brian Collie : Yes , stream buffers 171 172 Lamar Proctor : And so , does the stream go on the school property? I ' m just trying to figure it out . 173 174 Brian Collie : I ' m not sure if it goes onto the school property or not . 175 176 Charity Kirk : It' s two separate things . 177 178 Lamar Proctor: Okay . 179 180 Statler Gilfillen : I believe that this issue came before this board a few months ago and a decision was made . It has only 181 been a few months , can you clarify for me , why this is brought up before us again tonight? What is the justification of 182 change? 183 184 Bob Hornik : I can give you what I , as the applicant, think it is . The application previously was for a general use district 185 which would have allowed 110 + different uses . We had no specific site plan , no specific detail about the plan . That 186 Planning Board meeting was back in July or August of 2022 and after that meeting , we regrouped and said " here are 187 what the concerns were , it seemed to be that it was a Dollar General store and many people were concerned that with a 188 general use zoning , it could be almost anything . We thought that the best way that we could try to give some assurance 189 to the County and the residents of the area about what was going to go there , would be to step back , rethink it and to do 190 some of the engineering and to present a site-specific development plan and a conditional district rezoning . The non - 191 residential district is the district that' s available and suitable , for this kind of use . So , after some discussion with the 192 planning staff, they felt it was a different enough application , and we do too , in quality and in kind , that it wasn 't subject to 193 the one year waiting period . No one that I know of challenged that . 194 195 Steve Kaufmann : I remember distinctly talk of a Dollar General going in there . And that was one of the reasons , in my 196 opinion why the board wasn 't interested . It didn 't quite fit in with that community setting , with the residential and business 197 district in general . They were all against having a Dollar General store there . The discussion was about Dollar General 198 as I remember it . 199 200 Bob Hornik : I don 't doubt that for a second . however, I don 't think you can make a recommendation , under zoning , based 201 on who the user is . I would think that' s an abuse of the zoning power. 202 203 Beth Bronson : To his point, I think it had more to do with the character of the area than what the actual development 204 was . 205 206 Bob Hornick : Regarding the character of the area , you ' ve got 2 or 3 steel buildings across the street. In my view, the 207 facade that' s going to be on this Dollar General store , will be a significant improvement over what's in the area . 208 209 Cy Stober : What you have laid out before you is documented in emails from staff and Mr. Hornik , is the rationale for why 210 1 supported the application proceeding and didn ' t halt it . The ordinance does require that we get a dissimilar application 211 before us and what you see here , the zoning request for single use , proposed the difference in acreage , and then the 212 site specific commitments , and then furthermore , the lack of an impact to the commercial balance for development in that 213 activity node , are all the rationale for why I made the determination on behalf of the County that this application could 214 proceed . So , what you have before you , is my rationale and why I made that decision . That was before we saw a site 215 plan or anything , that was just the general nature of the request, and that it would be a single use with a site-specific 216 plan . Regarding the use , the use before you tonight is for a retail store . That is the only use that we as planners or you 217 as planning board can consider . There' s federal matter of due process and equal protection under the law, that has to 218 be considered . You cannot consider this with regard to the specific tenant that would occupy the building . There are 219 certain carve outs say , adult uses , that do consider specific uses to be exceptionally different from other commercial 220 uses or entertainment uses , but in the case of general retail store , we can ' t consider whether it be a locally owned and