HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_0899454
HEDRICK: We'll rc^onvene info regular meeting.
The question before us proposed by Mr. Davenport who has acted as our moderctor this evening,
our chairman, is: Is there a need for Heronwood to be here before us this evening? I think we need
to address that issue first.
I personally think that the need exists. I think that based on the impression, valid or
to
invalid, on the parts of the commissioners, present and previous, that certain things are going
indicates that they do
be done, and now changes are going to be done, and now changes are occurring
So having said that I would be
need to have the approval, in my way of thinking, from this board.
interested in hearing any contradictory thoughts to that effect.
STEWART: Is that a statement of fact on the part of the board?
HEDRICK: No. That's a statement of fact in my way of thinking.
STEWART: Will that require a vote?
HEDRICK: No. If there is any contradiction or if there were a notion that they need not be
here, it would be in order at this time.
Hearing none, we will proceed with the findings. I heard no motions. There were no motions
nor vote.
MILLS: (not clear) objections to your comments.
HEDRICK: Right.
HEDRICK: We've got to consider the two tests given here, if Mr. Davenport will keep me on
met.
tract. That is N1, that all development standards established herein have been satisfactorily
That's one.
DAVENPORT: That's the first test. Do you want to go ahead and address that one first?
DAVENPORT: Do you want to go down the standards one by one?
HEDRICK: Yes. Let's go over them again.
DAVENPORT: First standard is, Does the total development capable of creating an environment of
sustained desirability and stability? I think you restrict it only to the nature of the modifica-
it might be affected by
tion, don't look at the whole development, but only the whole development as
the of the modification proposes,
that modificati.m. so that is, given the nature of what proposal
of sustained desirability and stability?
does the development create an environment
HEDRICK: This total development, clarify that again, you're saying for us you discount the
future completely, total development. You think only in terms of,
DAVENPORT: It's still the total development, but the total development considering primarily
the sewage treatment, that is as it would be affected by this particular (not clear)
HEDRICK: As opposed to septic?
DAVENPORT: As opposed to septic. I would ignore the contrast. Say with the proposed develop-
ment, given the sewage treatment plant, would it be capable of creating an environment of sustained
desirability and stability?
HEDRICK: Is there any problem with that test? Or that standard?
STEWART: Would you state that one more time?
DAVENPORT: All right. The issue is, Given that we have a modification before us for a sewage
that
treatment plant and a modification of a PRO, would that, would the total development, given
desirability and stability?
modification, be capable of creating an environment of sustained
STEWART: And stability?
DAVENPORT: And stability. Sustained desirability and stability. Let me comment. This is the
broadest of all the standards that you will be looking at, with the exception of the last standard.
If you want to pass on that one and come back to it.
MILLS: I think that's the one you have to vote on, that one and the second test. (not clear)
be located or operated to create
That one and the one "that no part of the proposed development will
issue, and frankly I have problems with
a nuisance." 1 think that's an issue. I think this is an
the waste treatment facility. And the problem is that
both systems, both the septic systems and
the PRD approved, and they're not going to back away from it. They've already
we've already got
started building, so we have to pick and choose which one we feel like is most desirable or two
undesirable systems for multi -family residences located on the lake.
We are not going to have any trouble with any of the other standards, are we?
HEDRICK: The rast of them don't appear to be as, I guess, as vague, and left up to individual
is to be? The
'
interpretation as that one. L'ho knows what sustai:md desirability and stability going