AG 2009 08 17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

June 2009 - Planning & Zoning Draft Meeting Minutes would have happened? He said would any of these concerns be raised then; what did we miss then that we are now seeing. Ms. Watts said we haven't missed anything. She said there was a conservation easement showing on the map, we had discussions about it and Mr. Scribner had indicated during the preliminary plat process and it is in the minutes that he indicated that he was going to grant that conservation easement to the County, to the Soil and Water Conservation District. Mr. Prince would venture to guess that if it got past preliminary plat into final plat all of these issues would have come up too. Ms. Watts said we would expect that Mr. Testerman would just forget about it, that is what he does. The Chair said that easement would have been required to be granted before final platting. Ms. Morris said the preliminary plat that was approved did not contemplate any type of a gas easement on it; that is why we have this issue. That plat would have to be revised in order to accommodate that. She said depending on the extent of those revisions, more. than likely it would end up back in the Boards hands to reapprove. It would still have to meet the ordinance; it would still have to meet the open space requirements. She thinks soil and water conservation would still expect the conservation easement would stand, because that was part of the original approval. She said they would have to do a revised preliminary; even if he proceeded with the subdivision if you grant the extension. She said he is still going to have to do a revised preliminary, so, it is not going to look the same any more. Ms. Morris said what is before the Board is the original subdivision before that gas line became an issue. That is where she thinks Mr. Koch has been saying that it cannot really exist in the form that it is now, it has to be revised at some point if he anticipates proceeding with the project. Mr. Prince thinks in the same way as in the prior case where we logically did not have an issue so much with the buffer, but there was just more it could not fulfill the requirements of the application because there was no proof of hardship; this kind of falls into the same category. We cannot honestly sit here and approve something that we know is different because there is not enough information to determine how different it is going to be, how much it is going to impact, whether it the conservation easement evens go through is still undetermined. He said a couple of other things were brought up; the developer has sold the development rights on one lot and profited from the voluntary easement without owning that property and then still going through. He thinks it is wrought with a few problems and he would also probably hesitate a guess that this will not be satisfied within the next 12 month period anyway with the gas pipeline and a 12 month extension would be for naught. There being no further discussion, Mr. Ian Prince, MOTIONED, SECONDED by Mr. Mr. Baucom, to Deny Petition #02009-03 (SE) Preliminary Plat Extension for Rocky Glen. The vote was unanimous Attachment number 9 Page 83 of 315 E-1