AG 2000 10 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

534 Mr. Mike Downs, Development Services Director, briefly addressed the criteria in determining the existence of ho~ businesses, specifically the performance of work for the public. It will be the responsibility for the administrator in each Jurisdictiou to make the interpretation concel-ning the business. Mr. Patrick Wishon of Azalea Road asked the Board to postpone a vote on the proposed UPS. He expressed concern that only an 80 square foot outbuilding is allowed at a residence. Ms. Debbie Bro~ of the Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition expressed concer~s about the proposed adequate public facilities ordinance. These concerns included: (1) the determination of current levels of service; (2) the level of preparedness by such agencies as the School Board and Water and Sewer Authority that would be involved in administering the adequate public facility requirements; and (3) the development of a comprehensive needs plan. She stated the real estate community would meet on September 22 to further discuss the adequate public facilities issue. There was lengthy disCUssion by Board members regarding the proposed UDO and issues raised during the public hearing. These issues included the following: adequate public facilities requirements, including the determination of adequate levels of service and the development of a plan to maintain those levels of service; the advantages/disadvantages of cul de sacs and proposed connectivity requirements for subdivisions~ affordable housing; the merits of a uniform set of rs~ulations; and the principle of freedom and ownership of private property. ~ter discussion, the Board by consensus agreed to the following schedule of events= (1) Recess'the public hearing until October 16; (2) Meet on October 2 in a work session at which time staff will present a final draft document specifically referencing the County along with responses to public comments and questions that have been received concerning the proposed UDO; (3) Meet on Nove~60er 6 for a second workshop (if needed); (4) Vote on the UDO at the November 20~ Board meeting. UPON MOTION of Commissioner Privette, seconded by Commissioner Carpenter and unanimously carried, the Board recessed the public hearing on the proposed Unified Development ordinance (UPS) until October 16, 2000, at 6:30 p.m. in the same location (Commissioners' Meeting Room). ChaixTnan Fennel asked that persons submit in writing any questions/comments about the ~DO for evaluation by the Board and staff. proposed Unified Development Ordinance, Resolution in Support of the Co--unity College and University Bonds - Chairman Fennel resolution in support of the community college and university bond issue There was discussion regarding the amount of the proposed $3,1 billion decision as how to appropriate these funds. and unanimously carried, the Board adopted the following Resolution.