My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/1/1996
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1996
>
10/1/1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:51 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 8:50:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/01/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Boa 99 PAcE 30.7 <br />ANALYSIS: <br />The County Attorney has determined that there are no provisions for <br />the Board to grant a variance or to waive the Chapter 300 <br />requirements. Therefore, the only relief for Ms. Fothergill is a <br />change to Chapter 300 of the county code. <br />For decades, the county has required separation distances between <br />establishments selling or allowing consumption of alcoholic <br />beverages and churches and schools. In the 1960'x, the county <br />reduced the separation distances to legalize certain types of bar <br />uses in the Gifford area. The intent of the separation distances <br />is to prevent certain negative aspects of having bar uses close to <br />churches and schools, including minimizing the risk of minors <br />obtaining and consuming alcoholic beverages. In staff's opinion, <br />the code could be modified to distinguish between bars and <br />restaurants, or to exempt separation distances for churches or <br />schools located on commercially zoned property, or to reduce <br />separation distances where hours of operation are limited. <br />In fact, the Sheriff's Department has recently indicated an <br />interest in amending Chapter 300 regulations. For the past several <br />months, county staff have been working with the Sheriff's <br />Department's C.O.P.E. Unit concerning modifications to Chapter 300 <br />standards. Last June, planning staff sent the Sheriff's Office a <br />report and analysis addressing some of the same types of issues <br />with which Ms. Fothergill is concerned. That report suggested that <br />the Sheriff's Office coordinate closely with church groups and <br />other interested parties (e.g. schools) and formally request a code <br />change. Although planning staff has not been contacted by the <br />Sheriff's Office in recent months about Chapter 300 changes, the <br />Sheriff's Office may still be interested in the Board considering <br />some Chapter 300 changes. <br />In staff's opinion, there are good reasons, expressed in the report <br />staff sent to the Sheriff's Office in June, for the Board to <br />consider changing some of the Chapter 300 regulations. Since <br />Chapter 300 is not a part of the Land Development Regulations <br />(LDRs), the lengthy LDR amendment process does not apply. To amend <br />Chapter 300, the Board needs only to have a public hearing and <br />approve the amendment by a majority vote. It is staff's opinion <br />that the Board should direct the Attorney's Office and planning <br />staff to coordinate with Ms. Fothergill, the Sheriff's Office, and <br />other interested parties and present possible changes to Chapter <br />300 for the Board's consideration. <br />RECOMENDATION <br />Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners direct the <br />County Attorney's Office and planning staff to coordinate with Ms. <br />Fothergill, the Sheriff's Office, and other interested parties and <br />present possible changes to Chapter 300 for the Board's <br />consideration. <br />64 <br />OCTOBER 1, 1996 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.