Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 6 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
Moving on to the proposal for decreasing rear setback distance from 75 to 50 feet, the majority voted against the amendment, with Commissioners Miller and Stokes abstaining. “If w6’re talking about the dog kennel, we’re putting the cart before the horse. We’re worrying about the setback distance (at the Scrabble site) when we haven’t even decided it we’re going to allow kennels by special use permit or by right or whether they comply with the comprehensive plan,” stated Commissioner Fannon.
Mr. Konick opened the last of Wednesday’s public hearings by arguing that the comprehensive plan calls for public facilities to be located in the vicinity of the county’s villages and not in low density areas. “Scrabble is a low density area — it is not a village,” he said, adding that a pound will generate traffic, create noise and cause a problem with “sanitary considerations.” The Planning Commission is on record as finding that an animal shelter in an agricultural district is not necessarily in conflict with the comprehensive plan, he said. The attorney noted, however, that law requires a finding that a proposed use is “substantially in accord” with the plan. The two are very different, he said. “If there’s any ambiguity, it should be interpreted in a very narrow way to protect the landowners,” Mr. Konick maintained.
After quizzing Planning Commission secretary Cheryl Taylor on the notice of the joint public hearing given by the Board of Supervisors to the Planning Commission, Mr. Konick called the hearings “illegal and unlawful.” He asked for a copy of a site plan for the proposed animal shelter at Scrabble, saying he’d checked the file before the meeting and found none. “The supervisors simply faded to follow proper procedures to set this up,” he charged.
“A site plan isn’t necessary for what we’re doing here tonight,” Commissioner Miller responded.
The attorney disagreed. “How can the citizens have a clear understanding when the Planning Commission doesn’t? How can you say “a shelter at Scrabble” would be in substantial accord with the comprehensive plan? . . . There’s no site plan, no building plan. This stuff is supposed to be in the public file.” Mr. Konick refused the chairman’s offer to pass around the board’s site plan for the shelter at Scrabble. “That’s not sufficient ... It doesn’t give me much of an opportunity to prepare,” he insisted, his voice breaking.
Attorney Bill Fletcher said that despite the board’s intention to use Scrabble only as a temporary shelter site, ‘it may well be a long temporary site. It may cover a couple of years. In fact, it may be permanent.” He criticized the board’s decision to “tie up” an investment oi $25,000 for site purchase and $4,000 for improvements at Scrabble when the only use is for a dog kennel. Mr. Fletcher noted that the septic system there is destroyed, the top oi the tank caved in by a bulldozer. In addition, he maintained, the county will have to pay another employee $12,000 for 40-48 hours per week required to keep the shelter open. “Operation of the building is going to be your biggest expense,” Mr. Fletcher told the supervisors, calling the money spent on the Scrabble site “a bad investment. ”
He proposed checking with the 30-some private kennels in RappaContinued
on page 18
94.8%