|
|
||
Stafford officials pull a bait-and-switch on Crow's Nest property owners Date published: 2/7/2006
LAST WEEK, the Stafford County While Crow's Nest activists may applaud the commission's bravado, this action does little to advance any plan for "saving Crow's Nest." In addition, the commission's denial has serious implications for all property owners--since it probably infringed on the basic property rights of the Crow's Nest owner, and could be repeated in other instances. The commission's denial capped a series of procedural shenanigans engaged in by the county across the past several weeks. After a year of review and work with planning staff, on Dec. 7 the planning director issued a memorandum to the Planning Commission, concluding that the preliminary subdivision plan for Crow's Nest complied with all applicable county ordinances--and should be approved by the commission. This position was reiterated by the planning director in a second memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated Dec. 19, which analyzed comments made by the Crow's Nest activists during the Dec. 7, meeting. The memorandum concluded that "Planning Department staff is still confident that the proposed preliminary plan for Crow's Nest meets the ordinance requirements of Stafford County " A final memorandum from the planning director, dated Jan. 25, 2006, incorporates the earlier staff recommendation for approval of the plan. In the interim, on Dec. 7 some of the Crow's Nest activists filed what amounted to a frivolous appeal of the planning director's finding that the Crow's Nest plan complied with all applicable county ordinances, to the county's Board of Zoning Appeals. Only a few months before, the county's zoning administrator had ruled, in a nearly identical case, that the Board of Zoning Appeals had no authority to hear the appeal. This time, however, the zoning administrator passed the appeal on to the Board of Zoning Appeals and stayed--or brought to a halt--the Planning Commission's consideration of the preliminary plan.
1. Be respectful. No personal attacks.
|
|
||||||||||||