(Continued from Page 1) “That argument really bums me,”

(Continued from Page 1)

“That argument really bums me,” Mr. Dwyer countered, maintaining that he’s been making up the deficit for residential development with taxes on his 1,000 acres of farm and forest land for years. “I’ve gotten no benefits,” Mr. Dwyer maintained. “I’m not against paying taxes. I’m just against paying more than my fair share. ”

“I’m going to put houses up. The question is where I’m going to put them,” Mr. Dwyer told the planning commissioners, reporting that his farm holdings include three miles of road frontage. “Do you want to see the Fodderstack Road and Route 522 lined with houses? That’s your choice - pure and simple.”

Commissioners Fannon and Krebser held to their position that approval of Mr. Dwyer’s request would set a precedent for future cluster development. “The next one could be 15 or 25 houses, rather than three. Then we’d be off and running!” Mr. Fannon said.

“If you don’t want somebody to do this, then we’ve got to change the ordinance or add tougher standards (for approving cluster development),” contended Mr. Miller. “I think the ordinance sets the precedent,” he said of the revised zoning ordinance which received a unanimous recommendation for approval from the planning commissioners before it was adopted by the Board of Supervisors last December. "I think what Mr. Dwyer is proposing is better than the alternative.”

The retired attorney maintained that approval of his request would not set a legal precedent; that future applications for clustered development would be judged on their own merits and specific circumstances. “Here discretion plays a part.”

“I don’t believe that if we approve one, we have the choice of turning down another,” countered Mr. Fannon. J

The zoning administrator sided with Mr. Dwyer. Authorization of the three dwelling units “would not be precedent setting” except for another applicant with an identical request and identical circumstances,