HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_0893448
there is going to be a septic tan',. A lot of the opposition to Heronwood has dropped by the wayside
when they found out the effluent is not Joing to be put into the lake. Talk about being fair, an
issue of fairness, being consistent, don't just be consistent with one way, be consistent all the
way, be consisent with the vote that this board has taken twice already. You've already voted twice
and said you gotta go with septic tanks. So be consistent with that vote.
I deny Mr. Walser's contention that your authority and your approval is not needed for this.
Of course it's meded for this. If it's not needed for this, why did we go through all the rest of
it? You have the ultimate authority in determining about issuing building permits, not the state.
You can set whatever criteria you need to do it. And if you're encouraged to forget the word
"structure," remember the word "open space" and "accessory use," cause that's what the argument was
about with Mallard Head. It wasn't about structure; it was about open space and accessory use. A
septic treatment plant is an accessory use.
Another, I guess I really shouldn't wander when I'm trying to make an opening statement, but I
was under the impression that the two building permits that had been issued, which they are current-
ly working on, were issued with, assuming that they are going to use septic tanks, is that right?
BECKHAM: (Not clear) . . . .
BRYAN: Now, I believe just a few minutes ago, Mr. Hollan testified that their intention one
time was that if this thing is approved they are going to put in a septic tank.
HOLLAN: May I respond to that briefly? If I did testify to that, that's not what I meant to
say. What I meant to say that all the units eventually be hooked into the sewage treatment
facility. What I also meant to say if the timing was such that we could not begin a sewage treat-
ment facility, we might go ahead on a temporary basis with the approved septic tanks on individual
units. The building permit that is referred to in the minutes of January is a building permit for
those ten units, which authorizes septic tanks, and that's what we propose to put into those ten
units at this time. We'd like to hook them into the sewage treatment facility. It won't make any
sense to keep those ten units on their own septic tanks, but we're looking to hook them up to a
sewage treatment plant when it's available. But I did not mean to say that we're not intending
those things on septic tanks. I don't think there's any, we've got some of them that are scheduled
to close immediately. There's no way we could not put those on septic tanks, as we've now proposed,
in order to fulfill our obligations to these people. And I tell you it's very expensive to have to
do it one way and then go back and change, but we think that's the best way to do it.
That's all I have to say.
BRYAN: I guess 15 minutes is enough. I don't have any witnesses. All I have is a record.
All I have is wht transpired over these past years, what these gentlemen have told us, what they've
testified to, what's in the sworn statements. We did swear to this thing, and I would specifically
refer to comments of Mr. Hollan on pages 20, 21, 22, 48, and 49 of the Special Use Hearing that was
held on January 3, 1984. I would like to merely, instead of reading all of it, if you folks would
like to read it, to again show you what we were told as far as to what would happen if the PRD came
into existence. Let me just point out sentences on page 20. It's Mr. Walser "I have one question,
" (starting there) and Mr. Hollan's answer for the first paragraph, says "Yes, we do."
Page 21, about the middle of the page, a sentence beginning, "But during the course of this
zoning process, we have done the best to insure, etc."
Page 22, Mr. Hollan's response to a question from Mr. Parker, "But there is sufficient area set
side within this plan to more than serve all the units shown on this plat."
Then on page 48, the last paragraph, next -to -the last paragraph, beginning, "We have purposely
designed the plan to provide enough open space," and it continues on to the next page where he says, --
"If we get into more detailed engineering which will come as we develop this project, and we find
that there is not enough area provided for septic tanks, then of course we will have to do some-
thing. We can't get a building permit without an approved septic tank system. On top of that, we
don't want a building permit without an approved septic tank system."
I submit that all of the testimony and all the meetings up until the last meeting which was
ruled incorrectly held, all of the testimony that has been given, has led the opponents of this
development to believe that septic tanks are going to be used. And I submit that if they are not
used, then there has been a big breakdown in what the record shows and what we are now told.
I would like to put into the record this letter from the former chairman of the county board of
commissioners, Mr. Joe Troutman, who could not be here tonight because he is out of town. This
letter he wrote that has been sworn to and signed in front of the clerk to the board, Mrs. Alice
Fortner.
I would like to read it into the record:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Because of vacation schedules I am unable to attend the adjourned
regular session of the county board of commissioners. I would like
to again state for the record the following information.
Having been involved from the inception of the Heronwood and '
going through a lengthy process of meeting after meeting,
and finally bringing to a vote the approval of the