Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1955-10-20
CONTINUED from Page /

on coming from the Upper Mont
gomery County Planning Com
mission.
The Commission voted 80 for,
% Creation of permanent zon-
ing ordinance based upon COM
prehensive plans and necessary
related studies, (2) half-acre mini
mum lot size for home sites
throughout the upper County
planning district, 80 preparation
of coming ordinance with three
zones: residential agricultural,
commercial and industrial, and
"a preparation of a zoning map
establishing zones for the extern
sion of present commercial and
industrial sites.
j, G. Walker opposed the new
instructions to Mr.. Root, claim
ing, 1T is wasting the tax payers
money to hire a planner and
then order him what to do"
Mr.. Jamison retorted, "Mr.
Root has asked us for instruc-
tons because there's no use his
drafting an ordinance that's not
what we want"
Mrs. Werner, close to tears af-
ter the decision to instruct Root
had been reached, believed, "Mr.
Root cannot possibly prepare an
ordinance and map in so or 80
days" The County's contract
with the planner, at $50 per day
salary, binds the planner to pre-
pare a comprehensive coming plan
and permanent coming ordinance
in 80 calendar days"
Mr.. Jamison pointed out that
MIR. Root himself says he can
do it in that time" Mr.. Jami-
son gave County Manager M. L.
Reese a personal check for $500
to pay Mr., Roots salary if the
planner takes more than 90 days
to prepare the new ordinance.
In a parting shot Mrs. Werner
charged, ut is regrettable that
a majority of this Council sees
fit to go along with the real estate
interests. We have been battling
for years the belief that the Dem
ocratic Party is the party of the
real estate interests" All seven
Council members are Democrats.
The public hearing earlier in the
evening was Unexpectedly sub
dued The two major opponents
of the five-zone, five-acre-mini-
mum ordinance, the Farm Bureau
and the Upper Montgomery COun-
ty Landowners Association, Voic-
ed their opposition through at
torneys David Belts and James
r. Miller Mr.. Belts claimed, my
clients are not opposed to coming.
They are opposed to illegal at
temptS to zone"
Mr.. Miller charged, at all boils
down to the question of do you
have a plan. The answer is no."
The attorneys quoted from the
law book "Zoning Law and Prac-
tice' by E. c. Yokeley and from
the records of the Maryland Court
of Appeals to show that ordi-
nances similar to the one passed
last year in Montgomery County
and its amended version have
been overthrown in the courts as
"unjustified use of the police pow
err"
Ten people spoke in favor of
the old ordinance and its pend
ing revisions. Ten spoke against
it. Four persons made comments
without taking pro or con
stand.
In other actions at its regular
Tuesday meeting, the Council:
l. Ordered the County Attor,
ney's office to prepare the final
draft of an ordinance regulating
taxi cabs. The cabs will have
meters charging SOC for the first
mile-and-a-half and SC for each
additional Us of a mile. The
total number of cabs in the Coun-
ty will be frozen at $50. There
are $50 operating now.
2 Heard Finance Department
Director Alex K. Hancock state
that the County made only 1891 sc
from its Oct. q auction of prop
critics acquired at tax sale while
advertising and auctioneer ex-
penses totaled $696.96.
3. Ordered preparation of a re-
solution granting a coming ordi-
nance text amendment to the Gen.
eral Outdoor Advertising Com
pany, Inc, permitting billboards
down-county in zones II, 10, and
CO, and permitting billboards as