2024-11-17 Elizabeth Dunn - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Black Sands Beach. What are the shared values? This is only place where I can make my concerns known about the Planning Department, how its operates, and the culture within this organization, that may have any consequence. When I continue to read language about bringing people into the decision making process, I'm appalled, and it does't happen now. Why would I (or anyone else) believe it will happen in the future? 5. Chapter 4 - Sustainable Development and Resilient Communities Market Conditions - Sixth Bullet. I find this statement to be an excuse. This happens in Planning. Development applications are submitted, reviewed, processed, and most often, approved. This timeline doesn't always, and rarely meets the market for getting the product - housing commercial space, etc. - online at a time that meets developers expectations. What I find to be very confusing here on this island is that projects are approved, and not built. They stay on the books for a long time, and may or may not ever get built. Why go through the time, money, effort, and public engagement process to secure a land approval entitlement, and not build. The fault lies with the developer, not the Planning staff or the County. Please reconsider revising this statement, as I believe this statement puts blame on the wrong party. It's a risk to develop land. If the developer can't deliver, then that's not the right developer for the project or the neighborhood. I'd like to see some language in this section of the draft General Plan that prohibits or penalizes "land or entitlement" banking. That's a huge issue for this island, and it's not mentioned anywhere in this document. I know the County Council has passed or intends to pass several Ordinances to understand how many previously approved projects are still on the books and have not been built. That's an issue since the land is held by an entity that has secured a Planning approval, the Planning approval doesn't have real teeth regarding any expiration, and the land can't be built on. Let's be honest with this situation, and call for changes to the Planning process with Conditions of Approval that have real deadlines, Project Approvals that have real deadlines, and Developers that are paper jockeys and don't intend to develop. They hold the land hostage, and the community suffers. 6. Page 89, Resort. Please consider stronger language for 13.44, 13.46 and use "shall' instead of "should". 13.45 would be stronger if "Prohibit" were used instead of "do not allow". 13.48 - What is a clear community benefit? It should be more than money... If it's money, there should be a program that's created on how this money is used to benefit the community, and the community should be able to direct how this money is used. 13.50 would be stronger if encourage was replaced with "require". (There are other comments I made about using "shall" instead or "should" in this draft GP for the same reason and I won't include all of those statements here.) 7. Page 126, Drinking Water Please consider creating legislation that requires a water study for residential, commercial or industrial developments of a certain size (over 50 residential units, 50,000 sf. for example). This should ensure that water availability is not in question for these developments. Additionally, for projects that are on the books, but have not been built, and any money that has been paid for water credits, this money, and the credits revert to the Department of Water Supply after 5 years if no building permit has been issued. There has to be some way to incentivize development to occur (if that's the intent) and to discourage land banking/holding by entities that type up land without developing it for needed housing. (I realize this would be for the County Council to consider as it's legislation.)