What is your main issue with Karen Howard, Hales, Dasher, and others who seek to zone the county? What is your primary concern, and can you give an example of what you fear may happen?
I have several issues with the zoning approach by the Board of Commissioners. The current Board is using a one-size-fits-all zoning approach (R1 and R5 housing zoning) to impose a poorly-defined desire to limit uncontrolled growth in the agricultural portions of the county. They are doing this despite a contrary recommendation by the County Planning Board, doing this prior to the county comprehensive plan being completed, and they ignore concerns of those being zoned. This will lead to even more east-versus-west divisions within the county, and will prevent landowners in the rural western portion of the county from using their own land as they see fit.
What are some examples of the commissioners ignoring public input ("my way or the highway" approach you mention in your article on Chatham Journal)?
What are some examples of the commissioners ignoring public input ("my way or the highway" approach you mention in your article on Chatham Journal)?
One example is Commissioner Howard’s ‘I’ve heard nothing’ comment at the county zoning meeting. Another is Commissioner Hale’s declaration that she will see zoning in the county even if it means she is a one term commissioner. These approaches encourage divisiveness within the county.
I've heard there is talk of suing the board of commissioners? Are you a part of that effort?
No
Who would be a couple of good people affected by zoning to contact about their concerns/their opposition to the zoning?
Who would be a couple of good people affected by zoning to contact about their concerns/their opposition to the zoning?
You could contact any of the several concerned citizens who spoke in opposition to zoning at the county zoning meeting at the Historic Courthouse.
What about the argument that zoning is necessary to prevent a firing range from going in next to a daycare or animal refuge, etc.?
What about the argument that zoning is necessary to prevent a firing range from going in next to a daycare or animal refuge, etc.?
The Planning Board and two of the commissioners believe that there are other less invasive means of controlling growth - through open-use zoning, through existing county regulations, through environmental regulations, or other means. Zoning may be the most appropriate method but zoning without county by-in or without a good plan is likely to create additional political divisions within the county. Is an animal refuge better than a firing range? Is a daycare better than a pottery studio, a tractor repair shop, or a solar energy farm? The current approach mandates that every new, expanded or modified business in the newly-zoned areas of the county is subject to the whims of the planning board and county commission.
What about the argument that development is coming in one way or another from Wake and Orange and the eastern part of the county, and thus zoning is necessary to preserve the rural parts of the county--to confine a manufacturing plant or housing subdivision to one part of the county and leave the rural parts untouched?
What about the argument that development is coming in one way or another from Wake and Orange and the eastern part of the county, and thus zoning is necessary to preserve the rural parts of the county--to confine a manufacturing plant or housing subdivision to one part of the county and leave the rural parts untouched?
A well-thought out zoning approach may be the right solution for the county. This approach, of R1 and R5 zoning, merely means that the western half of the county is zoned to build housing. How will that preserve the rural parts? The R1 and R5 definitions define housing restrictions for the county, and do not address manufacturing. Zoning as currently directed by the Commissioners is imposing unnecessary government control over the legal uses of one’s own land.
No comments:
Post a Comment