9/30/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SEP 3 ® 198& EQQI( 65 FnE 8,91 increased burdenn o the county in regard to impact. on roads, 4 schools, fire protection, etc. The county has the legal right to require a new development to provide a place for people to vote just as they would to provide sidewalks and streets. Planner Shearer advised that if the development, for instance, is a private development with a guard gate, then the polling place would be only for the people in that development, not people coming in from the vicinity. Chairman Scurlock understood the idea behind the ordinance, and agreed that the residents in a large community such as Village Green would be receptive, but the only place he could see this would really apply is where people don't want it. He asked what necessitated us drawing up an ordinance without it first coming to the Commission. If we spend staff time on such things, he felt it should come from the Commission. He did not want people to be able to come in off the street and cause staff to spend hours working on something like this. Planning Director Keating advised that we do have a fee where this can be done, but if the Board desires, they can have a different policy. The Chairman and Commissioner Bird agreed that a lot of staff time can be involved with this and priorities must be set so that staff does not spend thousands of hours needlessly. Attorney Vitunac informed the Board that one of the things he was going to suggest in -the new Code review was a procedure for ordinances where they would come to the Board first to see if the Board desired to.proceed with them. Questions continued regarding how this would apply to dif- ferent type developments, and Director Keating noted that this is just a provision of site plan approval; so it would just affect new developments. Commissioner Bird did not see any threshold relating to the size of the development, and Director Keating stated it would only be those that have a clubhouse common facility, 56 Mo