Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses comprehensive plan update and urges stronger enforcement of lighting and sound conditions at ADLS site
Summary
Land use committee reported on a $63,725 bid to update the county comprehensive plan and board members pressed for firmer enforcement and follow-up on outstanding sound-study and ADLS lighting compliance issues tied to a special use permit.
The land use committee reported it received a $63,725 bid (from a vendor described at the meeting as "Tesla" in the committee update) to update the county comprehensive plan. Committee members said the quote appeared high relative to what committee members expected to budget and noted the plan is updated on a 10-year cycle and not due until 2028, giving the county time to consider in-house or staged options.
Separately, several board members pressed the county to escalate enforcement after not receiving promised sound-study and lighting-system reports from the operator of a site that holds a special use permit. “We were told back in August that there’d be somebody here in April to take care of some of these concerns... now then, it seems like... we’re getting crickets,” said Commissioner Ferguson, urging action to enforce special-use conditions.
The county attorney explained the enforcement pathway: once a special use is codified as an ordinance, the zoning administrator should attempt enforcement and, if unsuccessful, forward documentation to the state’s attorney’s office to pursue an ordinance-violation action. "Once a special use has been passed, it's codified as an ordinance... they'd normally deal with that. And if their efforts are not fruitful, they'd go to me, and then they provide me whatever documentation I would need to potentially file an ordinance violation," the county attorney said.
Land use committee members asked the zoning administrator to send another set of requests to the operator and indicated they would compare recommended text amendments from the Zoning Board of Appeals and the regional planning commission before returning a final proposal to the board at the next meeting.
No ordinance violation was filed at this meeting; the board directed staff to follow up with additional requests as a next enforcement step and to compile any proposed ordinance amendments for further review.
