Zoning advisory group flags cross‑reference errors in 622 redline
Summary
Committee identified inconsistencies in the '622' redline draft where references to conservation subdivision provisions did not match the revised Article 9; staff will circulate a revised red line limited to edits discussed at the meeting.
Dryden's zoning advisory group opened the July 2 meeting by pushing a review of the '622' red‑line draft to the top of the agenda after members found multiple cross‑reference mismatches. Members said the draft still referenced conservation subdivision requirements in the wrong districts (the revised Article 9 makes conservation subdivision required in RA and CV, not RR) and pointed to section citations in chapter 270 that need correction.
Staff confirmed they will circulate a revised red line that includes only the edits discussed in the meeting and will correct cross references (examples flagged included sections in the 270 series). The group asked staff to run a targeted pass so future versions do not introduce unrelated changes.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
