Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_0895 (2)450 What's the procedures? Who mares the closing first? Mr. Bryan? Mr. Bryan, do you want to make a closing? Can -ie keep yen to a narrower amount, like 2 to 3 minutes each in your closing? Would that be fine? BRYAN: I will even do better than that. I've said all I've got to say. DAVENPORT: All right. You've just got 2 or 3 minutes. WALSER: Just partly in response and further statement. First of all the issue at (not clear) It's not a two-lane road; it is not built to public road standards as such. I'd like to correct a statement that you said that you had twice before voted for condition to have septic tanks. I don't think that's what the record will reflect. There was no condition at all on our prior approval. You can't keep changing the game plan, was the statement Mr. Bryan made, and I tend to think that in theory that sounds good. And I certainly am not coming to change the game plan, but from day one Mr. Hollan has stood up here and told you that there is no way to plan a project that is going to last over 8 to 10 years and not make some changes. I'll tell you today that there will be some more changes. I don't have any right now hidden under my belt anywhere, but there will be some changes. It's only natural when you develop a process over a long period of time for a project this large, that there will be some changes. We have tried to come before this board with every change that has (not clear) . . . imaginable. F!e have not hidden any changes; we're not trying to hide anything. There will be some more. The rules, as I understand the ordinance, require that structures be shown on the map. The ordinance says for purpose of this ordinance, showing things on the map, that a pump station is not a structure. The ordinance says that. We still have come forward and told you about our changes, our plans, our findings. This idea of deluding the property is probably one of the things that has caused this more than any other thing. Testimony was, and I hope you all picked up on it, that for every square foot or square acre of ground that is available for using septic tanks, there must be an equal amount of land cleared of anything with a root system. That means trees, bushes, shrubs --grass is it. The ground cannot be disturbed for any purpose other than just to plant grass on it. And I think when the developers realized that they were talking about, and I think dozens of acres was the words used, of having just to cut trees and bushes, this is not the intent of the whole PRD. The intent is to have a harmonious developed plan that makes everything work better, interacting with itself. Finally, in closing, what I really have been somewhat concerned about are these allusions that Heronwood has been breaching faith, our credibility is being attacked. I think that is a little bit hitting below the belt. If you believe that, truly and honestly, then I feel sorry for you. This is something that ha evolved. This evolved as a result of spending a lot of money on engineers; this has evolved by tzlking to a lot of people. This is not something that from day 1 when we came in here and planned on building a package plant and said we couldn't get it approved, so we built a septic tank, you'll approve it, then we'll come back in and ask for a change. I think all of you are aware that there was sponsored by this board a sewer package plant tour that we all went on, or most of us went on, to look at these things. This thing has been an evolvinc process. I certainly, myself, stood up here about four or five months ago and told you to please go ahead with your ordinance if you are going to pass one so that we can meet the require- ments of the ordinance. We'll meet it; just make it a reasonable ordinance. We are not afraid of any ordinance. But please don't believe that anything has been done in bad faith. I think we have come to this board, come to Lisa, come to the planning office with every change, everything that we have found or done or wanted to do, and we intend to do the same in the future. We are going to have to work with this county commission for the next eight or ten years, it looks like, and it would be foolish for us to try to sneak around behind your back or do anything that would at all affect our credibility. Feel free to check on these developers anywhere you want to, with anybody they've done any work with or for in other counties, regions. I encourage you to do that. And I don't think credibility should be an issue. I think the only issue is you're here today, judge and the jury, you are to find findings of fact, not sentiment, not something that was said or done in the past. Your job, your duty, your charge, as commissioners when you took the oath, was that you would uphold and do your duty as a commissioner. Your duty now is to make a decision based on the facts of the ordinance, not on emotions, not on politics, but based on the facts that are before you, and I just ask you to look at what those facts before you are, and make your decision to support them. HEDRICK: Any other facts to come before the board (not clear) (Changing to Tape #5). DAVENPORT: Are we back on tape again? CLERK: Yes, sir. DAVENPORT: It appears that you have two issues before you. The first issue is whether Heron - wood needs to be before you, that is, are they, in fact, proposing a modification of their PRO, of their special use permit. I thin!; you might want to discuss that first. Then secondly, if you find they are, in fact, making a modification, then I would suggest that we address the two standards at least in the ordinance, and then we may have to go, The two standards I'm referring to will be the (1) Whether the development standards (I'm reading from 87.7) in the ordinance, and there are four or five I ticked off to begin with, have been satisfactorily met. And then t'.e (2) second decision is, if they're not satisfactorily met, I think we should identify which ones have not been met. Then secondly, whether the proposed develop- ment or modification de^cl-,pment would cr^_ata a nuisance to nearby residential areas. That would be ' the second decision.