Laserfiche WebLink
9.B.1. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM - BRIAN T. HEADY – REQUEST <br />FOR PUBLIC ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ABOUT PUBLIC <br />UTILITIES <br /> <br />Not present when called. <br /> <br />9.B.2. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEM – ADRIENE CUFFE – <br />RD <br />COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND 43 AVENUE <br />WIDENING <br /> <br />rdst <br />Adriene Cuffe <br />, 695 43 Avenue, recalled that during the June 1 meeting, Mr. <br />Thompson (Vero Millworks) came before them and earned everyone’s sympathy when his permit <br />rd <br />was denied based on the reduction of the proposed improvements to 43 Avenue to 3 lanes. She <br />questioned that denial because she later learned (from a DCA representative) that Mr. Thompson’s <br />permit could not be denied since the “existing Comp Plan has precedent” and such a change in the <br />Comp Plan could take up to 8 months. She then spoke of her membership on the Growth Task <br />Force and her privilege to serve on it. She was disappointed however because she thought the <br />exercise had little to do with controlling growth. Although some good recommendations came out <br />of addressing some of the LDRs, she hoped it was not designed just to pacify the moratorium issue. <br />Chairman Ginn asked Ms. Cuffe if she recalled at the first meeting of the GTF that it <br />was determined that the GTF would work on the LDR’s because “visioning” was going to attack <br />the Comp Plan and that they could all be involved in it. Also, at that time, Dr. Sullivan asked that <br />anyone who could not agree was welcome to leave if they thought for some reason it would be a <br />futile effort and there would be no hard feelings. Chairman Ginn stressed that it was presented at <br />the very start that they would go through the LDRs and that the “visioning” will take care of <br />growth. If Ms. Cuffe had any thoughts on that, she was welcome to put them down on paper. <br />July 6, 2004 <br />22 <br /> <br />