3/20/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

V BAR 2 0 1985 Bm 60 PvrF 214 review this situation, and his understanding from talking with Mr. Powell, talking with Carter Associates, and reading the Minutes of the Commission meeting was that the Commission already had considered all the facts, found this to be a unique situation, agreed that Mr. Powell deserved relief, and had given him clearance to proceed. Attorney Fennell did not believe the Board would be setting a dangerous precedent as Carter Associates informed him they had no other such cases where they had gone to the County and gotten approval to proceed as Mr. Powell did, nor did Attorney Fennell believe there is any Iquestion of Mr. Powell's good faith from the beginning. Chairman Lyons stated that as far as he personally was concerned, he did not feel we had enough facts at the last meeting, and he wanted to get those facts and then determine whether there should or should not be a waiver. He further pointed out that what somebody was told back when an ordinance was one way does not necessarily hold when an ordinance is changed. Commissioner Bowman noted that two of these lots were sold after the new Subidivision Ordinance was enacted. She believed Mr. Powell was poorly advised and felt the engineers should have made him aware of the situation. Commissioner Bird agreed that some lots were sold later, but they were set out under the old set of rules and part of the project got caught in the change -over. He did not believe Mr. Powell flagrantly disregarded what he had to do. Director Keating stated that even if that wasn't a violation of the old ordinance, he believed it was a violation of the intent of the ordinance. He -further noted that staff probably told people two years ago that they could clear their land and remove their trees, but we have a new tree protection ordinance now which prohibits this. The rules and regulations do change to protect the public, and we abide by the rules as they are now. 38 _I