Laserfiche WebLink
56. Incorporation of the deficient design standard for <br /> public accesses in the Subdivision Agreement by reference <br /> in bill 356 is plain error. Referencing the Subdivision <br /> Agreement in bill 356 incorporates a sub-standard spacing <br /> of public accesses for land in the residential district <br /> without a separate vote of approval by resolution. This <br /> violates the spacing requirements codified in HCC Chapter <br /> 39-5(a)(1) and The Sunshine Law. <br /> 57. HCC 34-5(a)(6) specifies that for lands in the <br /> residential district a spacing of public access(es) further <br /> apart than eight hundred to one thousand feet shall <br /> be approved by resolution of the County council. <br /> 58. Only the incorporation of the design standards <br /> codified in HCC Chapter 34-5(a)(1) by reference in Bill 356 <br /> would be consistent with the County Council's Rules of <br /> Procedure, Rule 27.2 (g) and the Sunshine Law. <br /> III COMPLTAN WITH TH TN HTN LAW CLAIM I. <br /> 59. The County Council is aware that there is an <br /> actual controversy concerning the proper procedures for use <br /> of the Subdivision Agreement. Persons have testified that <br /> the Subdivision Agreement specifies deficient spacing of <br /> <br /> public accesses and does not comply with HCC Chapter 34. <br /> Persons have argued that approval of deficient spacing <br /> <br /> between public accesses must be properly agendized, noticed <br /> <br /> and considered in an open meeting. The Council, for <br /> 15 <br /> <br />