HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_0896451
You may want to do that no�n or you may want to continue it and let me draw up something, a form
more or less, that you can work your way through. If you'd rather do that. Am I giving you clear
assistance?
HEDRICK: The form you're talking about.. What are we talking about there?
DAVENPORT: Just a checklist, one you should address first of all whether Heronwood needs, in
fact, to modify their PRD ordinance, was issue #1. Issue #2 is assuming they needed to, or if you
find they did need to, and secondly, whether the two standards, whether they've met the development
standards set out in the ordinance. Arid I've listed for you four of those, five of those, that I
thought that were particularly relevant.
Then secondly whether the proposed modification would create a nuisance to nearby residential
area. I don't think there's any evidence on the second one.
HEDRICK: For purpose of clarification to me, when you say whether they need to modify the PRD,
if I have heard the presentations correctly, it is not as much a "need to" as a "want to," based on
their feelings that it is a better, but defined "need," I guess I'm concerned with, the definition
of "need" in this case would be how?
DAVENPORT: "Need" being that they're making a substantial modification under the 87.10 of your
ordinance, that is they're making a modification to the special use permit, and that it's substan-
tial enough to follow (not clear) within that provision, and thereby they're required to do that. I
assume (not clear) . . . .
HEDRICK: I was misinterpreting from the other standpoint that they need to modify their
request, based on their ability to proceed with the septic tank.
DAVENPORT: The practical layman's term, that is, do they even need to be here? Is what
they're doing just simply something that is not a (not clear) .
STEWART: In a way, I'm misled on the whole thing. To be perfectly blunt, as I understood it,
this was a public hearing for a modification to a special use permit. How do these other things get
involved, these other points that you raised?
DAVENPORT: No. that isn't, the question of whether they can, in fact, modify the special use
permit is governed by your own ordinance. And your ordinance says that they can modify it if they
can prove to you, and I don't know exactly what the test is, they can provide to you that
STEWART: Since we're going to have to make a decision, I'd like to what what those are.
DAVENPORT: If they can prove to you two things. I'm just going to (not clear) of the evidence.
One, that all the development standards have been satisfactorily met. If they can prove to you that
they have met the development standards in the ordinance. The development standards are, one, that
the development, as modified, will be capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability
and stability. I might also add by additional tests, that it's more so with a package plait that it
was before. Two, that
WALSER: To interrupt your last statement here, I don't think there's anything in your
ordinance that says it has to be more so. I just think it has to meet tyre standards, I don't think
we have a burden to prove that it is more so than another one.
DAVENPORT: I think I appreciate the technical point, and I'm not so sure that I appreciate
the, all right, disregard that statement being "more so." Let me, wait a second, please.
O.K. Disregard that statement, just stick on the first statement which I'm going to repeat for
you.
All right. That it meet, the first test is whether the evidenca presented at the hearing
establishes that the development standards have been satisfactorily met. And then, the development
standrs are all of nd
ut I'm
ing
pointtaout the ones that �seem a to be relevant ndards on pges 5Bou5can aJ
use your own 0 of your judgment as to whether syou oo
think
others may be relevant.
1. The total development shall be capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability
and stability.
STEWART: Would you state the numbers of those, please?
DAVENPORT: Yes. 87.2(a). (b) I'm going to interpret this a bit. That yard set -back lot
sizes, type of drawing in front of you (not clear) use restrictions, as related to the modification
are appropriate.
STEWART: What number is that?
DAVENPORT: That would be (b).
(e) That the plans for the sewer system have been reviewed by the appropriate state agency.
' STEWART: If that were not the case, they wouldn't 'nave a permit, •sculd they?