|
36
<br /> DRAFT
<br /> 1648
<br /> 1649 Beth Bronson: Okay.
<br /> 1650
<br /> 1651 Cy Stober: You do not get out of that.
<br /> 1652
<br /> 1653 Beth Bronson: Okay.
<br /> 1654
<br /> 1655 Cy Stober: Yeah.
<br /> 1656
<br /> 1657 Beth Bronson: Because, again, like,what I do not want to see is a bunch of these applications come through and
<br /> 1658 because of this new streamlining process, it is easier for proposals and preliminary plats with all of
<br /> 1659 their Ts crossed and I's dotted to come in and then give up and sell out and then you are left with
<br /> 1660 a roadway.
<br /> 1661
<br /> 1662 Cy Stober: Sure.
<br /> 1663
<br /> 1664 Beth Bronson: On a piece of farmland that could otherwise be reconverted, right.
<br /> 1665
<br /> 1666 Cy Stober: So,yeah. This gives us more teeth to require that bond up front, and it gives us the ability to call
<br /> 1667 that bond. Does the county have an interest in building a road to nowhere? No. So,we also
<br /> 1668 have the discretion on calling the bond or not. If somebody goes bankrupt, if the developments
<br /> 1669 have billed out,we have to,we,we have an interest in converting that stormwater device to
<br /> 1670 function appropriately.
<br /> 1671
<br /> 1672 Beth Bronson: Yup.
<br /> 1673
<br /> 1674 Cy Stober: We do not have an interest in extending the road beyond where it already is, so we may not call
<br /> 1675 that bond, but we have the ability to do it. And/or that bond can be passed onto another developer
<br /> 1676 who has the financial means to complete the project.
<br /> 1677
<br /> 1678 Beth Bronson: Thank you.
<br /> 1679
<br /> 1680 Cy Stober: Yeah.
<br /> 1681
<br /> 1682 Beth Bronson: And I think this gets back to this overall point that I am trying to understand is, like,trusting staff to
<br /> 1683 make these decisions based on the ordinance and state level requirements as are written, right?
<br /> 1684 By taking these concept plans and preliminary plats which I know that, I know that I have been
<br /> 1685 part of more than one discussion where our interpretation of a concept plan is way more
<br /> 1686 convoluted than the concept plan actually stands, right? So, like,we are taking,we are putting
<br /> 1687 way more weight on a concept plan and developers are now able to, like, promise certain things
<br /> 1688 or, or suggest certain things that they will do, but that does not put that in writing, right? So then it
<br /> 1689 just becomes a very long conversation and so by not putting it back out for public opinion and
<br /> 1690 therefore trusting the process that we have in place in our county, like that is what this
<br /> 1691 amendment, like looks like to me, right? And all that to say I think that that places a larger
<br /> 1692 oneness on people in the planning board to proactively or reactively identify the standards that
<br /> 1693 they feel confirm better to long-range planning, development goals,and the qualities of the county
<br /> 1694 that they want to see, and that does not just apply for the planning board members or commission.
<br /> 1695 That applies for the public, right? So, yeah. I think that to your point,what you were talking about
<br /> 1696 is that there are not, there is no policy, or there is no standards related to what they are required
<br /> 1697 to do, so these questions that we are asking during some of these,you know, applicant
<br /> 1698 presentations,there is no, like,one, yeah,there is no, there is no recourse for us, right? But what
<br /> 1699 we can do is now react to any development moving forward or any development that has been in
<br /> 1700 place for the last 10 years, like, it puts an oneness on us as they, and advisory board,to suggest
<br /> 1701 to the commissioners what it is that we want to see, or what we think. You know, our community
<br /> 1702 wants to see standardized or how we want to see it developed, like, do we want to set higher,you
<br />
|