Minutes - 20080624 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Chair Jacobs: For the Attorney, as I recall, when we got enabling legislation to prohibit hunting while under the influence of alcohol, we also limited shooting of firearms within 1,000 feet of a school, is that correct? Geof Gledhill: I do not recall. Chair Jacobs: We do have a stipulation about distance from a school. Geof Gledhil: I don't recall that either, but we can get that to you. Chair Jacobs: I would suggest that the Planning Department do it since it's apparently an issue for them. • What's the speed limit on Terry Road? Is there a speed limit? Michael Harvey: I'm going to say 55 miles an hour. Chair Jacobs: One of the issues that we may want to at least talk to DOT about, it sounds like, if this is to go forward, the speed limit, and that curve that Mr. Boyarsky was mentioning. Does that have a sign on it that shows the curve? I would suggest that we might want to have that conversation with DOT too. And then the issue of the buildings that are toward the western end of this property that may or may not be removed. Is that a staff requirement that they be removed? Michael Harvey: The staff requirements for subdivision approval, we have not made any recommendation at all for that approval, so we would be required they be removed. Ultimately, because the subdivision, we have concerns about their proximity and location to common property lines. And as part of the subdivision requirement, we are essentially going to be asking this applicant about the removal of the structures. Chair Jacobs: I would hope that if that is what's required, it seems consistent with the philosophy of this owner that they be deconstructed and not demolished. Michael Harvey: Understood, sir. Chair Jacobs: Finally, on the issue of traffic, I think that this has been an issue in trying to balance traffic counts and rural character. I think we had this conversation at one point about what size subdivision was sufficiently large to affect rural character and therefore should be a special use permit. I think the same way; there is an issue here that I don't think is resolved. It's not just this subdivision or this proposal. At what point does the traffic, even though there is a tremendous capacity in theory on the road, does it not change the rural character of the community? And I don't think that the way that we measure traffic in our ordinance gets at that adequately. We often hear these kinds of concerns from rural residents when the traffic doubles and it's still only a thousand cars per day, "only" is a relative term, for them it's a huge increase. So, I would hope that whatever we do with this, if the Planning Board members and staff would think about how we might address this in a more systematic way so that we get at the issue of rural character and traffic and not just straight traffic counts.