2/18/1976 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r - PHASE WHICH SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN AND THE BOND BE SUBMITTED FOR EACH PHASE" THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SUGGESTED THAT PHASES BE 20 ACREPS, AS 10 ACRES, IN HIS OPINION, IS TOO SMALL A PARCEL FOR A MINING OPERATION. MR. WALKER STATED THAT THE MINING OPERATORS ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS SECTION. THE BOARD THEN DISCUSSED ITEM 12 - PERMIT REVOCATED. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED ACCORDING TO ITEM 12, THE BOARD WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVOKE OR SUSPEND AN OPERATING PERMIT IN THE EVENT THERE IS A VIOLATION, BUT HE SUGGESTED THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BE AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE STOP ORDERS ON THE SPOT IF THERE IS A VIOLATION AND NOT HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THERE IS A BOARD MEETING TO ISSUE THIS ORDER. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY RECOMMENDED THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BE GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND AN OPERATING PERMIT AND THE COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REVOKE A PERMIT. ATTORNEY COLLINS THEN STATED THAT THE ZONING COMMISSION ISSUED THE PERMIT, AND THEY SHOULD BE THE REVOKING AUTHORITY. HE REQUESTED TIME TO RE- VIEW THIS FURTHER, THE BOARD DISCUSSED ITEM 12A - VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES - AND THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF A PENALTY BEING IMPOSED ON THOSE NOT FOLLOWING THE ORDINANCE. ATTORNEY COLLINS INFORMED THE BOARD THAT ANY VIOLATION OF A COUNTY ORDINANCE IS A MISDEMEANOR. CHAIRMAN SIEBERT STATED THAT THERE IS NOTHING IN THE ORDINANCE STAT- ING THAT THEIR BOND WILL BE FORFEITED IF REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT COMPLIED WITH. THE ATTORNEY WILL INVESTIGATE THIS. THE CHAIRMAN ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO SPEAK. THERE WERE NONE, ON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER Loy, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY AGREED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE 71-2 - SECTION 25 - BE CLOSED. ATTORNEY COLLINS WILL PREPARE THIS AMENDED ORDINANCE, AND IT WILL BE AN AGENDA ITEM AT THE NEXT MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1976. -34- FEB V 18 1976