|
For more than a year,
developers have been submitting plans for mixed-use projects along Highway
92, east of Woodstock. These plans are unique: they are not coming through
the regular rezoning "pipeline," where a public hearing precedes a Commission
vote on the proposed change in land use. Under the Highway 92 Overlay
Ordinance, the County's planning staff determines whether plans conform
to the Overlay, with the result that there is no public or Commission
input before the dirt is turned.
The purpose of the Overlay is to set high
quality standards for commercial development contiguous to Highway 92
throughout Cherokee County. Somehow along the way, some of the County
staff and certain Commissioners began interpreting the ordinance to also
allow apartment complexes.
In recent weeks it has become obvious to
me, to other citizens, and even to the City of Woodstock, that the Overlay
Ordinance is unclear from many aspects, but very clear that apartments
are not allowed under the ordinance. On September 18, the County attorney
and planning director brought the Overlay Ordinance to the Commission
for further review. Four of the five Commissioners expressed concerns
as to the clarity of the ordinance during the meeting, but inexplicably,
by a vote of 3 - 2, voted that no review and rewrite was necessary, with
Commissioner Johnston and myself in opposition.
Most problematic is that there are presently
five projects proposed for Highway 92, before the planning staff, with
each including apartment buildings which are expressly not included in
the ordinance's list of permitted uses. Ignoring this list and applying
the current interpretation of part of the ordinance would allow unchecked
apartment development along Highway 92. In fact, the five projects represent
a total of 2,341 apartments.
Concerns of Highway 92 homeowners and the
City of Woodstock prompted me to put the discussion of the Highway 92
Overlay Ordinance on the agenda of our October 9 meeting. At the afternoon
worksession I explained to the Board that I wanted to discuss the ordinance
and highlight the list of permitted uses. At the public meeting that followed,
before I could present the list, Commissioner Sanders made a motion to
adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Biello, and approved by a majority by
adding Commissioner Singleton*. This unprecedented shutdown of the political
process left unaddressed all of the County's business on the agenda.
This political hijacking of the process by
three Commissioners has taken the hotly debated project approvals out
of the public eye. It has buried the underlying issue of the faulty ordinance,
depriving the public of an opportunity to participate in any interpretation
or modification of the ordinance. Why won't these three Commissioners
agree to hold zoning hearings on the five projects, or a public hearing
on the Highway 92 Overlay Ordinance?
Public pressure can be applied through letters
to the editor and to the other Commissioners, phone calls, and public
input allowed at the start of all Board meetings. Enough public pressure
may convince the majority of the Board to rethink its position on these
and other apartment projects on Highway 92. More important, a strong public
response may finally allow the debate on this ordinance to occur, and
ward off future commandeering of our political process.
*Editor's Note: The three Commissioners
voted to adjourn the meeting based on their interpretation of the six-month
rule regarding previously addressed issues.
|
