Laserfiche WebLink
be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event of non-compliance; and then from that point they <br />could go on to the withholding of further development permits, Code Enforcement action, if that <br />forfeiture threat was not significant enough. <br />Commissioners agreed to add the County Attorney's suggested language. <br />The Chairman opened the Public Hearing. <br />Rene Renzi, Waverly Place, referenced comments from Director Boling that this change <br />would speed up the process, and the compliance of regulations which is presumably initiated to <br />protect the public, and wanted to know which part of the public this benefits; whether it was the <br />individual homebuilder, the large developer, or the commercial builder. <br />Chairman Davis replied that anything that has to do with an issue of health, safety, and <br />welfare of any kind is not considered in this ordinance. He explained that it was not designed to <br />protect any particular segment of the community and also not designed to hurt anyone. It is just <br />to provide some flexibility; so instead of pulling up trees that are a couple inches tall, they would <br />be allowed time to get to the height requirement. <br />Ms. Renzi asked how does it help a small homebuilder, and Director Keating explained <br />how it would help under our landscaping requirements, including height of trees. <br />Commissioner Wheeler added that we are trying to figure out a way of lessening the <br />burden of the bureaucracy by adding some flexibility and commonsense into the process. <br />May 19, 2009 15 <br />